My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9326
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9326
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:34 PM
Creation date
5/22/2009 7:22:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9326
Author
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Title
Draft Biological Opinion for Ute Water/Plateau Creek Pipeline Replacement Project, Mesa County, Colorado.
USFW Year
1996.
USFW - Doc Type
Denver.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
~r <br />Plan item 1.A. .c.(3)(f)i), is scheduled for September 1996. Protection, Plan <br />'~~:~ item 1.A.3.c. 3)(f)ii), is scheduled for September 1997. Construction and <br />implementati ,Plan item 1.A.3.c.(3)(f)iii), is scheduled for September 1997 <br />~;~~~ through Apri 1999. <br />~' According to the Agreement, for historic depletions, these actions will serve <br />as the reasonable and prudent alternative as long as they are completed <br />according to the schedule identified in the Plan. Also, according to the <br />~, Agreement, if the Service determines that a recovery action(s) specified in a <br />previously rendered biological opinion can no longer serve as a reasonable and <br />prudent alternative (because a critical recovery action deadline is missed, a <br />recovery action is determined to be infeasible, significant new information <br />about the needs or population status of the fishes becomes available, etc.), <br />the Service will work with the Management Committee to restore the Recovery <br />Program as a reasonable and prudent alternative (by adjusting a recovery <br />action so that it can be achieved, developing a supplemental recovery action, <br />shortening the timeframes on other recovery actions, etc.). <br />The Agreement exempts historic depletions from the depletion charge. <br />New Depletions <br />The Project's new depletion is defined as the average annual depletion above <br />the historic depletion described above. <br />A. New Depletions Below Sufficient Progress Threshold (Phases 1 and 2): <br />1. Phase 1: <br />Based on an analysis of the hydrological and biological <br />information, the Service has determined that the Recovery <br />Program has made sufficient progress to enable it to serve as <br />the reasonable and prudent alternative to avoid jeopardy to the <br />Colorado squawfish, razorback sucker, humpback chub, and <br />bonytail and destruction or adverse modification of critical <br />habitat caused by an amount of the Project's new depletion <br />equivalent to the current sufficient progress threshold of <br />1,500 acre-feet. <br />For the purpose of comparison with the sufficient progress <br />threshold, the new depletion will be measured as the Project's <br />reduction of flows in the 15-mile reach below the Service's <br />recommended flows (described as "make-up" flows in the <br />hydrological analysis). Also, for the purpose of comparison <br />with the sufficient progress threshold, the new depletion will <br />be calculated as a "running" IO-year average. (The average of <br />the past most recent ten annual make-up flows cannot exceed <br />1,500 acre-feet). According to the hydrological analysis, the <br />Project will cause an average annual new depletion of <br />1,549 acre-feet, calculated as make-up flows, in the year 2006. <br />Phase 1 depletions will meet projected demands until <br />approximately the year 2006, however, if subsequent phases are <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.