4209

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 4209
• Author: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
• Title: Alternative Methods of Preserving and Recovering Three Endangered Colorado River Fishes, and Identification of Significant Environmental Issues.
• USFW Year: n.d.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

3
measures .have included continued research to further refine
the habitat needs of the fish, and to determine the feasibility
of certain fish passage and Habitat-restoration features. It
also appears probable that continued development of the river
system in combination with the depleted numbers of the fish
will necessitate funding of intensive-management options,
which may include artificial propatation.
The amount assessed to the project sponsor to fund such conservation
measures has been based upon the amount of water depleted by a
project, not because depletion is always the most debilitating
factor, but because it is common to nearly all water development
projects and so provides the most appropriate common denominator
for the division of costs. This concept was initiated in 1981
in the Windy Gap biological opinion and remains an integral
part of Section 7 consultation.
Under all alternatives, review of projects under Section 7 of
the ESA would continue. However, such conservation measures
under Section 7 are now being funded and carried out on a
case-by-case, fragmented basis. Tliis situation would continue
under this alternative.
B. Research Activities Only
This alternative involves the continuance and expansion of
current research activities. An extensive data gap still
exists regarding the basic survival and habitat needs of the
fishes. These survival criteria must be further determined
and refined. The effects of competition with other fish
species, and the occurrence and potential-for hybridization is
currently unknown. An expanded search for additional populations
of the fish, and more intensive monitoring of current populations
are necessary. Research into the efficacy of certain habitat-
restoration features is currently necessary.
This alternative would limit conservatiion measures to responding
to these research-needs at~d narrowing current data gaps.
Research results would be used by the FWS in Section % project
review and consultation to further determine the design and
operation modifications most effective in avoiding impacts to
the fish. Flowever, under this alternative, because of the
piecemeal effect, a major commitment of ].'WS resources would be
delayed until such time as research was considered essentially
complete. Intensive management practices, such as hatchery
propagation of the fish, would also be delayed since it would
not be part of the conservation measures.