Laserfiche WebLink
<br />f. . <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />, <br />I <br />, 7,' :Tb,e ;PrQgfol!ll ,j$r~P9nsible for pr,pvidi!lghabitat el~!lIe!lts ~hich the Service de~rmines <br />are essential ,tQ ,'recQY~ry, o("Plattl<~i'ler 'c;n~l!nger~(U~ies, not. i,!qividUal4-~tt;i( project <br />. . .' I <br />sponsors/owners. Whether or not a Section 7 review is required, the Program wilI work <br />coop€;J:lltiyely With th,e, Qwn~rs/operators of historicpr,pjec~, sponsors of propose9 projects, and <br />other parties, on ~ voluntary ,basis to identify, eval~ate, and implement actions n~ed to recover <br />the endangered species; habitats. , , ' ' , ,! <br /> <br />, :'." <br /> <br />'-" <br /> <br />'." '.' ...' <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />8. The responsibility for the efflciencY.l!Jld teffective!l~,s of the Program and for its viability <br />as a reasonable and prudent alternative rests upon Program parti!=ipants, not with the individual <br />project proponents. The Program participants fully share that responsibility. <br /> <br />9. If the Program cannot provide reasonable and prudent alternatives per item 6 above, as <br />a last resort, the Service wilI develop a reasonable and prudent alternative, if available, with the <br />lead federal agency and the project proponent. Program participants recognize that such <br />instances would be inconsistent with the intended operation .of the Program. In this eventuality, ,~ ; <br />lie reasonable and rudent alternative WI e consIstent WIth the ESA. ~ ~,~ <br /> <br /> <br />2.5.2 Bureau of Reclamation Review of Existing Project Operations ' '{.,~~~, <br /> <br />'l7~ <br />;:, ., <br />, Section 7(a)(2) of the Endangered Species Act requires federal agencies to carry out conservation <br />.. . . , <br />programs for listed species.' :Section 7(a)(I) als~ requires ffderal agencies to ensure that their <br />a~tions are ,not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of a listed species or to' adversely <br />modify ~r destroy critical habitat. , I~ order t~ determine if the water resource projects <br />constructed and operated by Reclamation in the North and, South Platte River Basin may have <br />adversely affected the threatened and ~ndangered. species habitat in central Nebraska, <br />~1t. Reclamation initiated informal Section 7 consultation with the Service in Fiscal Year 1991 to <br />~(1..nvestiga~ and evaluate the operation of ,exis!ing Reclamation facilities in the Platte <br />River Basin to ensure compliance with the ESA, The, evaluation includes the North and South <br />Platte Rivers froQ}, ,Reclamation's existing facilities through the Big Bend area of the Platte <br />River. Reclamation operates three projects on the North Platte River (Kendrick Project, North <br /> <br />26 <br />