Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOJ784 <br /> <br />FWS on whether the action or permit will likely jeopardize the continued existence of the <br />species or adversely modify its habitat. <br /> <br />Federal permits are required for a variety of private actions, In the case of the Platte <br />River, the most common are those issued by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission <br />(FERC) for the licensing of hydroelectric facilities, the U,S, Forest Service for the use <br />and development of water facilities on national forests, and the U"S. Army Corps of <br />Engineers under section 404 of the Clean Water Act for dredge and fill activities in <br />streams and rivers" Thus, the development and operation of most large water supply and <br />hydroelectric facilities, which supply water and electricity to millions of people and <br />irrigate tens of thousands of acres of land, come within the scope of the ESA. On the <br />other hand, private actions such as the drilling of wells and land use activities that do not <br />affect habitat are not subject to the ESA. <br /> <br />If in the consultation process the FWS believes that a proposed federal action or permit <br />will jeopardize a listed species or its habitat, it will issue a "jeopardy opinion," which <br />specifies the basis for the opinion, In that event, the federal action agency cannot <br />undertake the action or issue the permit, because to do so would violate the ESA. The <br />jeopardy opinion also specifies what alternative actions, called "reasonable and prudent <br />alternatives," could be taken to allow the proposed action to go forward while not causing <br />jeopardy" In that case, if the federal action agency or permittee complies with the <br />reasonable and prudent alternative, the action or permit may go forward in compliance <br />with the ESA. <br /> <br />However, even for those activities that go forward on the basis of a reasonable and <br />prudent alternative, if at any point the FWS becomes aware of new information that <br />affects its original determination, it may reinitiate the original consultatio-n" ,In this case; <br />the FWS may impose new terms and conditions on its reasonable and prudent alternative, <br />or may issue a jeopardy opinion" <br /> <br />As a result, the operation of the ESA has enormous consequences on whether significant <br />water and power resource development activities can occur, and how they-can operate, <br />The program contemplated by the Program Agreement will serve as the reasonable and <br />prudent alternative for all water development and use activities in the Platte River Basin <br />that could affect the habitat of the listed species. Therefore, it will serve as an umbrella <br />program, and avoid the litigation, confrontation and disruption that sometimes has <br />resulted from the imposition of the ESA's regulatory force on individual private parties" <br /> <br />The Colorado Permits. Many significant water facilities are located in Colorado's <br />national forests" These include reservoirs and diversion works that serve the cities of <br />Denver, Ft Collins, Boulder, Greeley and Loveland, and which provide municipal and <br />irrigation water to people in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and its <br />Municipal Subdistrict In its consultation on the issuance or renewal of land use <br />authorization permits by the Forest Service for many of these facilities; the FWS has <br />issued jeopardy opinions, because of asserted impacts of water development and use to <br />