8063

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 8063
• Author: Colorado River Fish and Wildlife Council.
• Title: Minutes, Colorado River Fish and Wildlife Council - April 22-23, 1998.
• USFW Year: 1998.
• USFW - Doc Type: Las Vegas, Nevada.
• Copyright Material: NO

The Council felt that this issue could better be
handled to CRFWC advantage by having a national organization
respond. It was agreed to have John Mumma send a letter
with the Council's concerns to the Chairman of the
International Association of F&G Agencies requesting this
issue be put on the September meeting agenda and a letter to
Mr. Doug Hanson, Chairman Fisheries Committee, explaining
the Council's concerns as expressed today. Should there not
be a position taken by the IAFGA, then the Council should
analyze the issue and respond.
Mr. John Fay, of the Endangered Species Office, USFWS,
Washington DC, Provided the report assisted by Mr. Henry
Maddux, Denver Regional Office. Authorization for the Act
expired in 1992, and since that time there has been a great
deal of political discussion toward strengthening or
reforming the Act. However, since 1992 no bill has been
able to make it's way to the floor of either House or
Senate. The two bills now under consideration will likely
not make their way into law.
Debate has generally occurred only about three or four
specific parts of the old act. A very big consideration has
been the issue of use of non-federal lands in conserving
species. It is a virtual certainty that whatever is finally
passed will forge a new solution and relationship when
dealing with non-federal lands. The second is the issue of
"good science" and impartiality. The third - the roll of
economics in species conservation - it being very difficult
to "tease out" what monetary consequences will indirectly
follow a biological action. Another issue - what is the
role of states - there are now amendments available that
provide for a greater role in assessment, comment and direct
authority. The new state role will probably be more strong
and explicit. The last major issue, critical habitat,
becomes complex, especially as it involves ownership.
Neither of the bills or amendments now consider the whole
issue of when or how critical habitat is to be handled.
The Senate (Appendix C) has bipartisan sponsorship and
an endorsement from the administration and is out of
committee. If it comes to a vote, there is fair chance of
Senate passage. However it is late in the session for this
bill to proceed through the House. It is this bill which
has received the most attention from the Administration in
negotiation with committee, sponsor, and both parties.
6

t

i

1

t
u