WSP01249 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . John Turner July 27, 1990 Page 3 the controversial parts of the project; yet you did not understand the benefits it would bring to the two Indian tribes as well as southwest Colorado. The manner in which the service reversed its longstanding public position that the San Juan squawfish population is not critical to the survival of the species also raises questions about whether the Service is biased against the project. As you know, the original section 7 opinion on the Animas-La Plata Project was issued in 1979 by Region 2 and determined that construction and operation of the project would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species. That conclusion was based in large part on the view that maintenance of the San Juan population was not necessary for the recovery of the species. In a very unusual process, the reconsultation was assigned to Region 6, which reversed the position taken in 1979 by Region 2. That was the first public indication that the service had changed its posture on the importance of the San Juan population. For example, the draft recovery plan for the species did not view the San Juan Basin popUlation as important to the restoration of the species. As late as last summer, the draft recovery plan did not include the maintenance of a self-sustaining population in the San Juan as necessary for the down listing or delisting of the species. It was not until April 16, 1990, shortly before the issuance of the draft opinion, that the recovery team actually proposed including the San Juan popUlation as part of the requirements for changing the status of the species. The procedure that was used was again highly unusual in that the proposal came after the draft plan had been circulated for comments. See 16 U.S.C. ~ 1533(f) (4). Even now, there has been no designation of the San Juan as part of the critical habitat for the species. Nevertheless, the sole concern in the draft opinion is the fact that the operation of the project may affect the habitat of the squawfish. The draft opinion's focus on habitat concerns raises serious questions about the failure to designate critical habitat for the species. It is the critical habitat designation which is intended to protect important interests which are affected by the application of the Act. H.R. Rep.