Laserfiche WebLink
which would avoid obstructions and, if it required compromise on the part of the DOI, <br />failed to meaningfully respond to genuine proposals, which would have led to a Program. <br />The FWS position was often cloaked in concerns about abdicating authority for the <br />protection of endangered species under the ESA or veiled in oblique suggestions of the <br />lack of any prevailing federal authority requiring a change in position. <br />A proposed Program is sought because the FWS have rendered opinions concerning <br />"potential" effects on certain target species. Such opinions are based on the collective <br />exercise of personal judgments by a small group of FWS biologists. For FWS to <br />maintain that within this amalgamation of human judgment, there is no basis for <br />compromise is incredible and displays a lack of good faith. As a result of these opinions, <br />many currently regulated and even unregulated entities, including governmental, private <br />and commercial entities will be required to cut back, curtail or forego water use with little <br />or no consideration of. 1) the costs to Nebraskans, 2) the impacts on vested rights, 3) the <br />equities of such infringements, or 4) compensation for such takings and infringements. <br />The CA and proposed Program must require the FWS and other federal participants to <br />sincerely pursue new methods and integrate the professional judgment of independent <br />experts, using sound and peer reviewed science, to identify the actual water and other <br />habitat needs of the target species. <br />A recent example of the FWS's obstinate and uncoordinated approach in working on the <br />CA is the way they have dealt with the Habitat Protection Plan (HPP). Despite the efforts <br />of a wide range of area landowners, resource specialists and habitat experts and literally <br />years of work on the document with ample opportunity for incorporation of input, the <br />local office of the FWS frustrated the process as it neared completion. They apparently <br />snubbed the direction of their Regional Office in Denver and that of the Governance <br />Committee and insisted on incorporation of their own approach. This flies in the face of <br />the "cooperative" spirit of the effort. As a matter of policy, Program documents such as <br />the HPP must be approved by the Governance Committee and once approved become an <br />accepted part of the proposed Program. That is, they represent the consensus position, <br />not solely that of the FWS or a few of its employees. <br />Proposed Designation of Critical Habitat for the Piping Plover- <br />Another timely example of the effects of ESA in the central Platte Valley involves the <br />FWS's proposal to designate critical habitat for the piping plover. The Central Platte <br />NRD is troubled by the FWS's approach to propose critical habitat for the piping plover <br />and their associated supporting documents including their draft Economic Analysis and <br />draft Environmental Assessment. We have twice submitted comments and have <br />requested an extension of time to address these concerns. Not because the species isn't in <br />need of reasonable conservation and management efforts, but because of the FWS's legal <br />and factual deficiencies in the designation process. As a result of these significant <br />shortcomings, we have formally requested the FWS withdraw the proposed critical <br />0 <br />