Public Meeting on Critical Habitat for Colorado River Fish

Home Browse Search

example, to offset the impacts of small riprap projects in urban areas, the Service has proposed to the Recovery Program the use of flood easements, conservation easements or other incentive programs to protect the flood plain areas. Such areas could serve as open space, river walks or other purposes that could stand occasional flooding and provide habitat for the fish, offsetting the cumulative impact of shoreline areas with riprap and other structures. Q. Won't the designation of critical habitat hurt the quality of life in communities adjacent to critical habitat, causing local communities to lose their water rights, eliminate flood plain developments and prevent new flood control projects? A. The designation does not take existing water rights nor does it require the removal of existing flood plain developments. Any new flood control project or other water development projects would likely be subject to section 7 consultation, and if destruction or adverse modification of critical habitat was found, reasonable and prudent alternatives would be developed to address the project purposes. Actions without Federal involvement are not affected by the designation of critical habitat. Q. Why hasn't the Fish and Wildlife Service prepared an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)? The designation of critical habitat is part of listing under the Endangered Species Act, and the Department of the Interior has determined it to be exempt of the National Environmental Policy Act. The 1981 Sixth Circuit Court decision in Pacific Legal Foundation y. Andrus (657 F.2d 829) held that an EIS is not required for listings under the Act. The decision noted that preparing an EIS on a listing action would not further the goals of NEPA or the Act. The Service believes that the reasoning behind this decision is sound and that preparing an EIS on the proposed critical habitat designation would not further the goals of NEPA or the ACT. The NEPA documentation should be done on management plans and activities that involve critical habitat; section 7 consultation is conducted on those actions. In addition, the Service believes that the Draft Biological Support Document and Economic Analysis provide the public and decision - makers the same information that is generally supplied in a NEPA document, whether through an Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment. If there is an individual Federal project that affects the human environment and critical habitat, the Federal action Agency would determine if NEPA compliance was required and would deal with the issue at that time.