Agenda Item: Endangered Species Cooperative Agreement (4)

Home Browse Search

-2- Fair Share Over the last year the states have been unified over several issues (i.e., channel morphology, species and habitat baseline, species needs etc.), however with the assembling of the various program elements the focus will now shift to differences that may exist between states. One of the most significant issues that must be resolved has been termed "Fair Share". Broadly speaking the concept of fair share may include how each state will contribute and be credited for money, water and land. What makes this issue especially controversial is how this concept may apply to future water related activities. The Board will recall that in simple terms the CA addresses both past water development and future water development. The commitment of 130,000-150,000 acre feet of water (Colorado's share via the Tamarack Plan is 27,000 acre feet) is for mitigation related to past water development. In determining fair share the concept is that the combined value of water and money should be equitable and that as water is developed for the program it should not increase the mitigation responsibility of another state. Each state and the federal government is also responsible for developing and implementing a future depletions plan. The future depletions plans lay out how impacts to species and habitat target flows will be avoided or mitigated. Nebraska in particular believes that the concept of fair share should include how and how much water each state is allowed to develop in the future. This interpretation could create inconsistencies with the South Platte Compact. Budget The program budget continues to be a major problem and fair share also has relevance in terms of the equitable distribution paid to the program collectively by the states versus the federal government. The CA was based on a 50-50 split for program costs between the states and the federal government. With the cost of the program increasing from the estimated $75 million to as much as $150 million this cost distribution may need to be reassessed. Pallid Sturgeon One final issue I would like the Board to be aware of is how the program may address the Pallid Sturgeon. The Pallid Sturgeon is a large river fish that has primarily been associated with the Missouri River. There is limited capture and/or documentation of the use of the Platte River by the Pallid Sturgeon. Nevertheless, the Service has indicated that they have issued jeopardy opinions in the past for water development on the Platte system, and that some form of a reasonable and prudent alternative may be needed. We have talked in some detail with several water users regarding whether the proposed program is the proper venue to address the Pallid Sturgeon. A reasonable argument can be made to not include the Pallid Sturgeon in the proposed program but that likely would necessitate either individual mitigation for the Pallid or some other joint program to address mitigation. The states have asked for more detail regarding what information needs to be collected for the Pallid, when, and how this information should be coordinated with other Pallid Sturgeon initiatives on the Lower Platte and Missouri River before we decide how to address this species. Flood Protection • Water Project Planning and Financing • Stream and Lake Protection Water Supply Protecrion 9 Conservation Planning