WSPC02434 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

0003J2 SvnoTJsis Sixteen Years Experience in Dealing With the Endangered Species Act: What has the Colorado Water Congress learned? by Tom Pitts Water Consult Engineering and Planning Consultants Loveland, Colorado The Colorado Water Congress initiated a Special Project on Threatened and Endangered Species on the December I, 1983. The objectives of this project were to resolve conflicts between implementation of the Federal Endangered Species Act and continued development and management of water in the Colorado River basin and the Platte River basin. After four years of negotiation, a solution was developed for the Upper Colorado River basin. Development of an interim solution for the Platte River basin required 12 years of discussion and negotiation. The Colorado Water Congress and its members were active partners in the negotiation of these solutions, and are active participants in implementation of the programmatic solutions developed for the Colorado River basin and the Platte River Basin. From my perspective, the important things water users have learned from these experiences include: The Endangered Species Act is here to stay. Efforts to change the Act have been ongoing since 1991. No bill has passed Congress. Substantial changes to the Endangered Species Act which would alleviate the need for negotiated solutions are unlikely in the foreseeable future. Litigation under the Endangered Species Act to protect the interests of property owners and developers generally has not been successful. Procedural changes have been achieved, and in one case where there is an actual taking of property, the U. S. Supreme Court sent the case back to lower Courts for review. However, federal courts have generally upheld the administration of the Endangered Species Act by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The goal of the Endangered Species Act is to recover the species. Enforcement mechanisms through Section 7 or Section 9 of the Act will not lead to recovery. If Section 7 and Section 9 are the only mechanisms available, there will be continued conflicts between development and endangered species protection. There is room for negotiation of mutually acceptable solutions under the Endangered Species Act, provided all parties are willing to negotiate. This means that all parties will give up something in order to get something. Development interests have much to offer in negotiated solutions in return for real regulatory relief from ESA burdens, including political support for pro-active solutions that lead to I