My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7857
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7857
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:32:57 AM
Creation date
8/10/2009 4:11:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
7857
Author
Wigington, R. and D. Pontius.
Title
Toward Range-Wide Integration Of Recovery Implementation Programs For The Endangered Fishes Of The Colorado River.
USFW Year
1996.
USFW - Doc Type
\
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
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
Under the approved recovery plan for the squawfish, the importance of.these <br />river reaches as recovery areas for the squawfish in the Lower Basin is to be <br />re-evaluated based on the success of these re-introductions. From 1981-1989 <br />razorback suckers from the Lake Mohave stock were re-introduced to their <br />historic habitat on the Gila, Salt, and Verde Rivers in the Lower Basin noz: as <br />experimental populations, but under an agreement between the Arizona Game and <br />Fish Department (through its Commission) to forgo listing of the razorback <br />while this re-introduction program was implemented. Also prior listing, <br />razorbacks were released into the lower Colorado River mainstem in 1987 and <br />1990 and into the upper Green River in 1988 and 1990. Bonytail from the Lake <br />Mohave stock have been returned to the lake and re-introduced to national <br />wildlife refuges on the lower mainstem and to the Green River in Dinosaur <br />National Monument in the Upper Basin. The success of most of these re- <br />introductions has been limited. <br />UPPER BASIN PROGRAM <br />Background <br />After its Section 7 regulations were finalized in 1978, the FWS began <br />conducting biological consultations on projects authorized under federal <br />reclamation law and on any other water development in the Upper Basin that <br />needed some kind of federal permit, often a dredge and fill permit under <br />Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. In consulting on federal water projects <br />in the Upper Basin, the FWS concluded that these projects would be likely to <br />jeopardize the continued existence of the listed fishes unless water was <br />released from these projects to offset their depletions. In these <br />consultations, the BOR agreed to fund a three year study by the FWS, which <br />would be the first attempt to specify the instream flows needed to avoid <br />jeopardizing these fishes. In consulting on federal permits for state and <br />private water projects, the FWS took the position that any flow depletion <br />would likely jeopardize the listed fishes, but began accepting a prorata <br />contribution towards an estimated cost of specifying and meeting the habitat <br />needs of these fishes. This approach was first taken in 1980 with the Windy <br />Gap project on the upper reaches of the Colorado River, and was applied to a <br />number of other projects while the instream flow prescriptions were being <br />developed. <br />In June 1983, the FWS tendered a draft conservation plan which prescribed the <br />instream flows throughout the Upper Basin thought necessary to recover the <br />listed fishes. These first flow prescriptions would have limited some water <br />development and were vigorously questioned by the states of Colorado, Utah, <br />and Wyoming and by traditional water users and developers, who were also <br />concerned that the FWS method for accounting for cumulative and related <br />impacts in Section 7 consultations would abrogate water right priorities <br />established under state law. By 1984, the FWS had decided to withdraw the <br />draft conservation plan and its flow prescriptions and respond to an <br />initiative from states of Colorado, Wyoming and Utah to discuss the <br />organization of a mutually acceptable program for conducting Section 7 <br />consultations on water projects and for working cooperatively towards the <br />recovery of the listed fishes in the Upper Basin. <br />These parties, plus the BOR, formed an Upper Colorado River Coordinating <br />Committee, and sketched out the concepts for such a program. The core <br />concepts were that this program would serve as the reasonable and prudent <br />alternative in Section 7 consultations on water projects, allow the <br />development of interstate water compact entitlements in compliance with the <br />ESA, and provide for fish.recovery by comprehensively addressing their habitat <br />needs and other limiting factors. The identification, protection, or <br />restoration of instream flows was to be only one, major element of the <br />program; it would be complemented by restoration and protection of floodplain <br />and backwater habitats, the construction of fish passages, better control of <br />7
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.