My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Correspondences Concerning Upper Colorado Biological Opinions 1993
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
5001-6000
>
Correspondences Concerning Upper Colorado Biological Opinions 1993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/30/2013 11:32:04 AM
Creation date
8/13/2012 1:46:03 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Correspondences Concerning Upper Colorado Biological Opinions 1993
State
CO
Date
11/30/1993
Title
Correspondences Concerning Upper Colorado Biological Opinions 1993
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Biological Opinion
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
64
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
United States Department of the Interior <br />FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE <br />Mountain - Prairie Region <br />ua RULYRUM To: MAILING ADDRESS. STREET LOCATION: <br />ES Post Office Box 25486 134 Union Blvd. <br />Mail Stop 60120 Den, ed Federal 25 �' °°d° Co�a0 80228 <br />NOV 3 0 1993 <br />Memorandum <br />To: Director, Upper Colorado River Basin Recovery Implementation Program <br />From: Chief, Federal Activities and Special Projects <br />Subject: Language Used in Reasonable and Prudent Alternative for Upper <br />Colorado River Biological Opinions <br />At the November 23, 1993, Management Committee Meeting a request was made for <br />examples of the current language used in biological opinions covering water <br />depletions from the Upper Colorado River Basin. A concern had previously been <br />expressed at the July 20, 1993, Management Committee Meeting that the language <br />used in the Vidler and Trout Lake opinions implied that the project proponent <br />was responsible for completion of all elements of the Recovery Implementation <br />Program Recovery Action Plan. Because this is not the Fish and Wildlife <br />Service's intent, the language was changed to avoid this implication. <br />Attached are-three examples of opinions using the current language, one is all <br />historic depletions (Pacific Corporation), one is all new depletions (Gilbert <br />Family Trust), and one has both types of depletions (Seven National Forests). <br />The specific paragraph in the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative section is <br />underlined. <br />Attachments <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.