Board Meeting 05/03/1985

• Board Meeting Date: 5/3/1985
• Description: Minutes, Agenda, Memorandums May 3, 1985
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

Mr. David Getches
Page Four
I
We are convinced that the hydrology subcommittee's assign-
ments should be designed to assist the Coordinating Committee in
the execution of both its short-term and longer-term duties.
Thus, we strongly urge that at its next meeting the Coordinating
Comm ' -- - - . - subcommittee to assess the im acts on the
system's flow regime of the depletions encompassed by all pen i.ng
consultations as well as those already completed. The results of
that assessment are indispensable to identification of the "base-
line" upon which both future consultations and a recovery plan
must be founded.
2. Section 7 Consultation for the Second Round of
Water Sales from Ruedi Reservoir
What is urgently needed at this time is a pause in the
continued issuance of biolgical opinions that sanction further
depletions, until a comprehensive conservation plan can be imple-
mented. This would permit the agencies' biologists to gather the
data that are needed to fully evaluate the effects of specific
projects on the endangered fish species and the effectiveness of
measures for offsetting those impacts. At the same time, the
policymakers would have an unhindered opportunity to deliberately
weigh alternative conservation strategies.
• In our view federal agencies have a special responsibility
in this regard, for two reasons. First, federal agencies have a
duty to use their statutory authorities to promote the Act's
purposes of conserving endangered species. Second, federal
agencies such as the Bureau of Reclamation are represented on the
Coordinating Committee and should ensure that their actions do
not impede the Committee's ability to fashion a conservation
plan.
We fear that the Bureau's insistence upon completion of the
section 7 consultation for the second round of water sales from
Reudi reservoir will have precisely that effect. Commitment of
that block of water to a consumptive use, no matter how specula-
tive, will limit the Committee's latitude in formulating a conser- '
vation plan since the sale reduces still farther the small pool
of unappropriated water that remains available for ensuring some
level of minimum flows. On the other hand, the Bureau has not
demonstrated there is any "need" for the immediate sale of this
water. We believe the Bureau should have refrained from press-
uring the Fish and Wildlife Service into completing the section 7
consultation, to give all of the affected agencies and the Commit-
tee a chance to develop a long-range solution to this problem.
Moreover, we are disturbed that the Bureau is insisting
that the Fish and Wildlife Service complete the section 7 consul-
tation without discussing this issue fully with the Committee.