Laserfiche WebLink
Risk of extension of federal nexus - The framers of the ESA envisioned a law that would <br />protect species believed to be on the brink of extinction, rare species like the bald eagle <br />and whooping crane. I believe its' fair to assume that they never imagined a law that <br />could potentially reach out to affect the lives and operations of agricultural producers and <br />communities who pump groundwater from wells 5 miles north of the Platte River. <br />The FWS has indicated that pumping groundwater that is conjunctively tied to the surface <br />waters of the Platte is adversely affecting target flows for endangered species and <br />therefore affecting or "taking" or "harming" the species. <br />They are therefore demanding that there be no new uses of surface water or groundwater <br />that would reduce or deplete in any way their demanded "target flows ". They have gone <br />on to say that if such a program isn't developed that they have the authority, through the <br />Endangered Species Act, to come after water users through other federal programs. <br />Other projects and programs with a federal connection that, according to FWS, could be <br />used by them to regulate irrigation and other water uses include such things as: <br />-Crop Commodity payments <br />-EQIP — Environmental Quality Incentive Program <br />-CRP — Conservation Reserve Program <br />RC &D's — Resource Conservation& Development <br />-PL -566 <br />-WRP — Wetland Reserve Program <br />-WHIP — Wildlife Habitat Incentives Program <br />- Swampbuster- Wetland Conservation <br />-Rural Electric Program <br />- Conservation Technical Assistance from Department of Agriculture. <br />Fair share — The CA is founded on the principle that a basin wide solution for endangered <br />species concerns in the Platte River watershed is required. This principle is in turn <br />grounded on each of the three states and the federal government equitably sharing the <br />costs of actions required to comply with ESA. The determination of the fair share to be <br />contributed by each state has yet to be made. Components of the proposed Program <br />require Nebraska to contribute far more in water and control of its natural resources and <br />to receive less credit for resource management. The fair share concept must be applied to <br />properly apportion ESA compliance between the states and.the federal government in a <br />manner which proportionately reflects the actual impacts of state activities on endangered <br />species and which reflects actual water consumption. <br />Obstinate federal government — Cooperation and mutual trust are cornerstones of the CA <br />process. However despite words to the contrary, federal actions to date fall far short of <br />full and good faith cooperation. Federal representatives involved in the various CA <br />committees have adhered to pre- compromise opinions and courses of action, in spite of <br />reason, arguments and persuasion to the contrary by the three states and their <br />representatives. They have failed to meet deadlines, failed to pursue courses of actions, <br />