BOARD01709 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. David Getches Page Six . possible to recover these species to the point where they fully occupy their historic range, the plan should at least recover the species to the point where intensive management is no longer necessary to ensure their survival. ----Si-x.ttLl-the..-p.J..an-.should-take--into-account that exotic spe'ci'es"- c=' n the~i X, system have a detri~ental=-f.!.ect...2.~,_t:.J:lEl_U~j;.e.d.--. d.m__~ spec~es. Thus, the plan should ~nclude measures to prevent the , on ction of exotic species into areas where they are not currently found, and should encourage efforts to eliminate exotic species in cases where that is feasible and does not conflict irreconcilably with other public policies. ...,........l Seventh, artificial measures may be usefu u on y as par ~;f a larger, co~prehensive effort to recove~, t~e_~~sh s ecies. ~e proponents of such measures should bear the burden of proQf. Before its adoption, an artificial measure must be demonstrated to (a) appreciably contribute to efforts to prevent the extinc- tion of one or more species; (b) not lead to significant genetic changes in the stocks; and (c) be a temporary measure that will restore the species to a condition where active human interven- tion and the continued investment of public resources are no longer necessary. Moreover, as the plan's reliance on artificial .measures increases relative to measures designed to protect the listed species' ecosystem, the proponents of artificial measures should bear an increasingly stringent burden of proving that such measures will contribute to the species' long-term survival. Eighth, timing is an important issue. It is essential that any measures (e.g., hatcheries, withholding water in federal reservoirs, operational changes in Flaming Gorge) be ~n plac~... before the actions that those measures are designed to mitigate occur. 7 4. The Committee Should Examine How Changes ~ State Water Rights Systems Would Enhance Protection of Endangered Species and ~ther Instream Values A final matter deserves your attention. As you know, main- taining instream flows, even the minimum amounts necessary to avoid species extinction or to promote other conservation objec- tives, has not traditionally been considered--and in many west n l? states today is still not considered--a beneficial use l~g~lly v- protectable under state law. As a result, these water rights ,,0. systems are, in substantial part, responsible for the current plight of the river basin's endangered fish species. Thus, we believe the Coordinating Committee must include in its discus- sions a consideration of possible changes in state water law as ~ well as changes it apparently intends to consider in federal law.