Laserfiche WebLink
<br />c <br /> <br />I. Upper Basin states will contribute a total of $17 million, with an appropriate <br />amount apportioned to each state. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />2. Colorado will loan $17 million to the two recovery programs to be repaid by <br />power revenues collected from Salt Lake City Area Integrated Projects Firm Power <br />Contractors. This will allow these contractors to participate in funding the capital <br />costs of the Recovery Implementation Program and meet project repayment <br />obligations within the 50-year time frame established by the Colorado River Storage <br />Project Act with minimal impacts in power rates. <br /> <br />Base Funding <br /> <br />The bill also authorizes the Bureau of Reclamation to use power revenues to provide $6 <br />million in base funding for the programs through 2011. After 2011, power revenues may <br />only be used to operate and maintain the capital projects and for monitoring, unless <br />Congress authorizes additional funding. <br /> <br />Much of the potential water development in the San Juan River Basin is for the benefit of <br />Indian Tribes, and most of the designated critical habitat for the endangered fish is on <br />Indian trust lands. The development of Indian water resources and the resolution of Indian <br />water rights issues (including the Colorado Ute water rights settlement, the completion of <br />the Navajo Indian Irrigation Project and the Jicarilla Apache water rights settlement) <br />depend upon the success of the San Juan River Program. Secure funding of the recovery <br />efforts is key to the protection ofIndian Trust Assets. This proposed legislation, while not <br />fully funding tribal participation in recovery efforts, will play an important role in <br />protecting Tribal Trust Assets in the San Juan River Basin. <br /> <br />Impacts of Proposed Changes on the Endangered Species Act <br /> <br />The proposed legislation does not amend the federal Endangered Species Act. <br /> <br />Most of the amendments to the Act that have been considered by Congress contemplate <br />changes in how a species is listed, what constitutes the taking and harassment of a species, <br />or the Act's consultation provisions. In fact, none ofthe amendments proposed since 1991 <br />would have eliminated the need for these recovery programs. Rather, most of the proposed <br />amendments put even greater emphasis on local efforts to protect threatened and _ <br />endangered species. ., <br />