Laserfiche WebLink
<br />{}GU914 <br /> <br />budget, but it appears inappropriate that the U. S. fish and Wildlife <br />Service should be burdened with approximately half of the <br />Program's costs. <br /> <br />Recommendatiun <br />National Audubon believes that additional consideration should be <br />given to establishing a separate authority and a line item in the <br />Interior Budget to specifically provide any Federal funding for the <br />Program. <br /> <br />5.1.4 Water Project Contribution <br /> <br />It is entirely unclear how depletion charges would be spent. It <br />would not be appropriate for the depletion charges to fund the <br />ongoing costs of the Platte program, inasmuch as that would place <br />program staff in a conflict of interest in reviewing projects. <br /> <br />. Recommendation <br />The draft should be revised to clarify how the depletion charges will <br />be spent. <br /> <br />Under the upper Colorado River program, depletion charges <br />apparently go to National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, an option <br />that is well worth considering in this case. <br /> <br />Pllge 14 July 30, 1993 <br />National Audubon Society- Comments on: <br />PltM.JS-l\tIA WG IS Draft "Pblttc Uivcr Habitat Conservation Progr.lIn." <br />