Laserfiche WebLink
<br />" <br /> <br />--- <br /> <br />( <br /> <br />,.- <br />" <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />j~ \;C s~~~ed nbove~ the vJlorado River belo~ the co~fluc~cc ~ith the Dolores <br />is i:::?o:::e!J.t to t1;e recovery of the endlln1;Cied cndc:nic fishes. It is, <br />tbcrc:o=~; ~portant not to ~educe present flows lliltil ~c obtain sufficient <br />bioloGical dntn trillt insures any reductions would not be h2~ul. . <br /> <br />The depletion, of ,.,;ater supplie.s will also tr.ocify":.thc salinity. temperature t <br />~c. tu=bidity..-.6f' the '-;ater. Colorado squa,,;fisb" and hu::;pback chubs are <br />fo=3. i:l the :COlorado and Green Rivers where s!llinitv ra::ses fron 200-1700 ro.g/ 1. <br />ACCD=cii~b to;ihe Final Environw~ntal Statement (FES)~ for the Dolores rrojectt <br />\{ll:er and P~;er Resources Service (h?RS) projects are e'~ected to elevate <br />salinity co,:,centratio:l.S at lI::periaJ. Dmn to' 1,214 0.'<,/1 by year 2000. <br /> <br />. .'.- .... .. <br />Cl?eration ,,,{'the Paradox Valley Unit will reducesalinit)' concentrations in' <br />the Dolores'Eivcr beloVl the confluence "~th the San V~gu~l from a flo~- <br />weighted-average of 659 cg/l to 355 0611 (U.S. DOl 1979). Questions relating <br />to the beueficie1 or aaverse iwpact associated \lith these salinity moofication.s <br />= only ~e B.n5>lereC by additional infor=tion hopefully obtained during <br />Fi:S r s bt~!:lsiYe ,studies of the end:mgered fishes. <br /> <br />. . . ('" - <br />T~eratu=e aad turbidity are probably more important to the fishes' life <br />st~ges th~ sE1i~ty. Hoveve~) more information'from the ongoing FHS study <br />~.i.s needed to define teroperature and tu:::,bidity'requiresents before the <br />Sib~fic~lce of DOdifyi~g thQse equztic pararreters C~~ be assessed. <br /> <br />Tne c~~ative effects fro~ the ebove projects EEY constitute a serious <br />threat. to the eT~ste~ce of the Colorado squa~isht bo~ytail .chub, and h~back <br />c..'-lu":l. Tnerefore, it is our biologic.sl opir1io:l that the Dolores Proje.ct, <br />along ~~th tue c~ulative i=pect from related Colorado River Storage <br />Projects currently in operation and others that have been approved for <br />o?eration after Endangered Species Act revi~', is'like1y,to jeopardi:::e the <br />coc~inue~ existence of the Colorado s~wi~ish, bony tail, chub, and hu=pback <br />ch:;b.. <br /> <br />A1.ter~at~ves <br /> <br />!De Ecdangered Species Act requir~s FwS to reco~cnd reasonable and prudent <br />alte~~:ives for any, proposec project lll,ely to jeopardize the continued <br />e,:,:iste,'1ce of a listed species. The purpose is to avoid j eOi'ardi:.-in:; listed <br />species ~hile allo"~ng inplenentetion of tbe proposed project or allo~~ng <br />~ al~ernative that wuuld eccooplish the ae5ired objective. .~e heve .discussed <br />tl"..:..s requirp....""at ....."ith yo~_ ~t.aff. <br /> <br />, ~ <br />7~'e'. mst se-:-ious pro~le.=i~ posed by the Dolorc9 Proj cct is the loss of \."':1t:cr <br />fm::: tllC Colorndo D..ivc.r belo.w"the confluenc.e \..'i.~h the oolo;:~e !'...:ivcr.. We'" <br />. kilO". of on.l)~ one alterns.tiva \..td.cil l-iOuld allo.... the p~oposed proj ect to be' <br />ccoSt::-u:.t.ed. and o:?c.ratcc. \..-i.thou~ 3eopr~~di:::..n:; the" Colorad.o squ4l\lrfish. <br />h~Dnu chub, ~:J.d bony tail chub~_: Tnat. ultcr;'.1itive is the' release. of \.:uter <br />fro=: the :>O:'0:::e5 Project, or fro;;;"othcr proJec~5 thE.t reculate f1c....s in the <br />Colorado Rive:::" to :::c?lece the depletions caused by the Dolores rroject. <br />