Habitat Protection Plan Comments

• File Number: 8461.100
• Description: Adaptive Management Workgroup
• State: CO
• Basin: South Platte
• Water Division: 1
• Date: 1/7/2000
• Author: Greg Walcher
• Title: Habitat Protection Plan Comments
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Correspondence

STATE OF COLORADO
Colorado Water Conservation Board
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman Street, Room 721
Denver, Colorado 80203
Phone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]
J2T1Uary 7, 2000
Mr. Dale Strickland
Executive Director
Platte River Cooperative Agreement
2003 Central
Cheyenne, WY 82001
Re: Habitat Protection Plan Comments
Dear Dale:
4
Bill Owens
Governor
Greg E.Walcher
ExecuHve Director
Peter H. Evans
CWCB Director
Dan McAuliffe
Deputy Director
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Habitat Protection Plan. The
State of Colorado recognizes the many challenges relative to obtaining lands or interests
in lands for the benefit of the target species while establishing and maintaining good
relations with the local communities.
The State of Colorado has grave concerns about the adhering to the budget as
agreed to in the Cooperative Agreement. Program dollars should go towards protecting
areas with existing suitable habitat rather than that which requires restoration. Protecting
and restoring land that merely has potential as suitable habitat will be costly and
inefficient. To realize the maximum benefits, suitable habitat should be sought first and
foremost. Only where absolutely necessary should the Program purchase land that
requires restoration.
In the proposed budget, operations and maintenance costs are exceedingly high.
Every effort should be made to reduce such costs. Third party mitigation costs also seem
high. As the Hazen and Sawyer report points out, third party impacts are mitigated by
many positive impacts from the Proposed Program. Land acquisition costs should also be
adjusted to the fair market value of agricultural lands. Much of the suitable habitat is
likely to be unsuitable for agriculture production in its current state. Accordingly,
acquisition costs should be lowered to account for such factors. To offset costs,
partnerships with local communities, private citizens, interest groups, and state and
federal agencies should be pursued wherever possible.
While obtaining habitat "complexes" may be ideal for the species, realistically,
the Program should concentrate on obtaining parcels that provide habitat components.
Moreover, the emphasis on complexes overshadows quantification of habitat protection
in acreage as provided by the Cooperative Agreement. When considering suitable lands