Laserfiche WebLink
Chapter I — Purpose of and Need for Action <br />combined effect of these measures are understood and determinations of future remedial measures can be <br />scientifically determined. However, in order for a coordinated, Basinwide program to be adopted, the <br />basic provisions of a program must be ones which all parties can agree to implement. <br />Therefore, the signatories believe that an incremental, Basinwide, cooperative approach is the most <br />effective, efficient, and equitable method, and that it will provide greater certainty for water users <br />regarding compliance with the ESA. The purposes of the cooperative effort are to: <br />➢ Improve land and water habitat for the target species to assist in their conservation <br />and recovery. <br />➢ Ensure that the effects of future water development activities are offset so that they are not <br />likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the species. <br />➢ Provide greater regulatory certainty for water users by providing ESA compliance for existing <br />and new water development projects. <br />➢ Help prevent the need to list more species. <br />➢ Accomplish these objectives in a Basinwide, comprehensive, and collaborative fashion that <br />will help ensure that Program actions are coordinated and effective. <br />More details are provided below under the proposed Program. <br />If a Basinwide, cooperative Program cannot be implemented, Federal agencies and the projects they <br />operate, or for which they provide funds or authorizations (which include many state and private water <br />projects), must still comply with the ESA. The alternative to a Basinwide approach to ESA compliance <br />would be for each water project to undergo separate ESA review and develop separate measures to offset <br />loss of habitat for the target species without relying upon the Program. <br />The attachment, The No Action Alternative, explains why a separate, project -by- project approach to ESA <br />compliance is likely to be significantly more costly for water users and less effective for offsetting <br />impacts to the species habitat. <br />December 2003 <br />AW <br />