Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I> <br /> <br />seeking an up front mitigation payment froo <br />proposed projects to off-set the present <br />impacts to the already declining <br />populations. <br /> <br />In other words, because FWS has identified <br /> <br />that the fish species are presently "in <br />jeopardy" even without the impacts of the <br />proposed projects, ~lS has determined that <br />mitigation should be imposed now. There is <br /> <br />obviously no causal. connection between the <br /> <br />- <br />projects undergoing permitting and the <br />already declining populations. <br /> <br />b. The conservation measures recommended by <br /> <br />nlS during current Section 7 consultations <br />are directed to a fifteen mile stretch of <br /> <br />the Colorado River and for the Gunnison <br /> <br />River up to the Redlands Dam and are not <br />causally related to MAEI's activities or <br />other oil shale projects. The ~~I Draft <br />Biological Opinion calls for an intake <br />screen designed to protect an ill-defined <br />(but probably scant) population of fish <br />from the effects caused by others. The <br />Draft Biological Opinion for MAEI's Para- <br />chute Oil Shale Project raises serious <br /> <br />-23- <br />