WSP01249 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

MAY 28 '91 11:03 ~DFORD & SHIPPS . P.2/4-' . ,:g,>~Wi}:)'Ii)/;- : ~)~,:;:;{~:,,:1::;:_~~ ':t!:;~~: ;;';':','/',: l'l".J:f;),,'\:;i '::''', ," ' Ji..l :.. . .... ~ ",<:):~~~,<> ::?;'~:;~; '-:"~r)fi \\i'~\~:"z . .I'~..'~":'-'- SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN TRIBAL COUNCIL 9'rikl fA/!air, 03..ilJiK9 POST oPPla BOX 73 7 IGNAOO. COLOlADO 81137 303.56304'2' LIONARO C. IIURCH. C;~IIUIIAN VIDA B. PEAIOD." VICE CN............N C~..IINT J. FROST. calolNCIL ........(11( . ULLIAN I. S!IIIL.. COUNCIL ME.81:111 GUT ,.INN.COOI.. JR.. COliNe,," NE"'.IIII ORJAN L. BOX. COUNC:I&. .......'" .EVA...,.N L. HuaaON. COVfilCIl.. N,Mac. May 29, 1991 Mr. RObert Jacobson U.S. Fish & Wildlife ServIce P.O. Box 2SQ88 Denver, CO 80225 Mr. Jim Young U,S. Fish & Wildlife Service P.O. Box 1306 Albuquerque. NM 87103 RE: Memorandum of Understanding Dear Bob and Jim: :' We are writing on behalf of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, the Ute Moun- tain Ute Indian Tribe and the Colorado non-Indian sponsors of the Anllnas-La Plata Project ("A/Lpl) to propose an amendment to the proposed memorandum of understanding (IlMOU") to Implement the reasonable and prudent alternative ("RPAIl) contained In the draft biologIcal opinion for A/LR received by the Bureeu of Reclamation on March 27, 1991. The pUlpose of the amendment Is to accommodate the apparent reluctance of the Nav,4ljo Nation to execute the memorandum In Its present form. You should be aware that we prevIously wrote to Pre"dent Zsh to advIse him of our support for the completion of the Navajo IndIan Irrigation ProJect (INiIP"). We also stated that we would support an amendment to the ,MOU that established that In the event the four tribes In the bllSln did not receive theIr full entitlement of water, all federal projects In the basin wol.l4d have to accept a reduction In their water supply to ensure that 'the tribeS received an equitable allocation of water (a copy of the letter is attilChed). To date, we have not received any response to our proposal. Our understanding is that the Navajo Nation Is unwilling to execute the presently proposed MOU and that the Fish and Wildlife Service Is hesitant to proceed with the RPA in the absence of a MOU signed by the Navajo Nation. The contention that the Navajo Nation must agree to the memoran- dum Is founded on the need to protect releases of water from Navajo Reservoir for the benefit of the endangered species. We believe such