My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
9387
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
9387
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:35 PM
Creation date
6/1/2009 11:37:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
9387
Author
Brookshire, D. S., M. McKee and S. Stewart.
Title
A Four Corners Regional Focus on the Economic Impact of Critical Habitat Designation for teh Razorback Sucker, Humpback Chub, Colorado Squawfish, and Bonytail.
USFW Year
1997.
USFW - Doc Type
Albuquerque.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
94
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
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br />1 <br />1 <br /> <br /> <br />Executive Summary <br />This report examines the economic impact of critical habitat designation for four fish species <br />endemic to rivers in the Four Corners region of the American southwest, so-called because <br />Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, and Utah all touch one another at one point in this arid land. <br />The report focuses on impacts to an area comprising 10 contiguous counties in the Four Corners <br />region that would be affected by actions taken on behalf of the designated fishes. Impacts to the <br />10-county region are then projected for a subset of the region comprising four Native American <br />tribes. Impacts to the tribal subset are apportioned using two different approaches: on the basis <br />of tribal population, and on the basis of tribal employment. <br />This report is a supplement to an earlier study, "Economic Analysis of Critical Habitat <br />Designation in the Colorado River Basin for the Razorback Sucker, Humpback Chub, Colorado <br />Squawfish, and Bonytail." The overall results of this study are quite similar to those of the <br />earlier study: At a qualitative level, the total economic impacts represent a small fraction of the <br />baseline level of economic activityfor the defined regions. <br />The Endangered Species Act requires that the economic effect of critical habitat designation be <br />computed separately from the total effect of listing and designation. The method of apportioning <br />the total economic effect on the basis of designation alone is provided in the earlier study, which <br />determined that the effects of designation of critical habitat for the listed fishes was 10 percent of <br />the total economic effect. <br />To determine the total economic effect, a baseline projection "without fish baseline" (WOFBA) <br />was constructed for the regional economy that includes planned development projects, and an <br />alternative projection "with fish" (WF) that considers the effects of critical habitat designation on <br />selected sectors of the economy throughout the study period. The WF projection includes <br />impacts from projected actions taken on behalf of the fishes, including water flow maintenance <br />and habitat protection. Direct impacts in the WF projection occur in the electric power, <br />1
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.