Correspondences Concerning Upper Colorado Biological Opinions 1993

Home Browse Search

Elizabeth Estill, Regional Forester 16 REASONABLE AND PRUDENT ALTERNATIVES On January 21 -22, 1988, the Secretary of the Interior; the Governors of Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah; and the Administrator of the Western Area Power Administration were cosigners of a Cooperative Agreement to implement the "Recovery Implementation Program for Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado River Basin" (Program) (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1987). An objective of the Program was to identify reasonable and prudent alternatives that would ensure the survival and recovery of the listed species while providing for new water development in the Upper Basin. In order to further define and clarify processes outlined in Sections 4.1.5, 4.1.6, and 5.3.4 of the Program, an additional agreement addressing Section 7 consultation on depletion impacts was developed. The Section 7 agreement establishes a framework for conducting all future Section 7 consultations on depletion impacts related to new projects and those associated with historic projects in the Upper Basin. Procedures outlined in the Section 7 agreement will be used in conjunction with the Recovery Implementation Program Recovery Action Plan (Plan) to determine if sufficient progress is being accomplished in the recovery of the endangered fishes to enable the Program to serve as a reasonable and prudent alternative to avoid jeopardy. The Plan is expected to be finalized in September 1993 and will be reviewed annually. In accordance with the agreement, the Service has agreed to assess impacts of projects that require Section 7 consultation and determine if progress toward recovery has been sufficient for the Program to serve as a reasonable and prudent alternative. If sufficient progress is being achieved, biological opinions will be written to identify activities and accomplishments of the Program that support it as a reasonable and prudent alternative. If sufficient progress in the recovery of the endangered fishes has not been achieved by the Program, actions from the Plan will be identified which must be completed to avoid jeopardy to the endangered fishes. For historic projects, these actions will serve as the reasonable and prudent alternative as long as they are completed according to the schedule identified in the Plan. For new projects, these actions will serve as the reasonable and prudent alternative so long as they are completed before the impact of the project occurs. The Forest Service projects covered by this biological opinion involve both new and historic depletions. The evaluation by the Service, to determine if sufficient progress has been achieved, considered (a) actions which result in a measurable population response, a measurable improvement in habitat for the fishes, legal protection of flows needed for recovery, or a reduction in the threat of immediate extinction; (b) status of fish populations; (c) adequacy of flows; and (d) magnitude of the project impact. In addition, the Service considered support activities (funding, research, information and education, etc.) of the Program if they help achieve a measurable population response, a measurable improvement in habitat for the fishes, legal protection of flows needed for recovery, or a reduction in the threat of immediate extinction. The Service evaluated progress separately for the Colorado River and Green River subbasins; however, it gave due consideration to progress throughout the Upper Basin in evaluating progress toward recovery.