My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02092
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02092
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:34:24 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 10:54:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8240.200.10.A
Description
UCRBRIP Program Guidelines
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
12/20/1988
Author
USDOI/FWS
Title
Historic Background Statements
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />.. <br /> <br />ENDANGERED FISHES RECOVERY PROGRAM - UPPER COLO. RIVER BASIN <br />December I. 1994Dr.ft Outline <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />. FWS; <br />. Bureau of Reclamation; <br />. Western Area Power Administration; <br />. Water Users (one representative from the 3 state area); and <br />. Environmental Interests (one representative from the 3 state area). <br />. Decisions by CONSENSUS. <br /> <br />C. PROGRAM GOAL: to recover the endangered fIShes while allowing water <br />development to proceed. <br />. Recovery Program is intended to provide "Reasonable and Prudent Alternative" <br />(RP A) to address the depletion effects of water projects in Section 7 consultations. <br />. "Recovery" is a better deal for the species than the ESA can independently deliver <br />(regulatory protection of the status quo is not a logical objective for species on the <br />brink of extinction; perpetual regulatory confrontation isn't desirable from any <br />perspective). <br />. "Jeopardy" element was the initial focal point in ESA Section 7 consultations <br />because FWS didn't designate "critical habitat;" ESA Section 9 "takings" <br />regulation hasn't been a factor (yet?); in 1994 FWS was required to designate <br />"critical habitat," and declared that the intent is for the Recovery Program to cover <br />the "critical habitat" aspects of the regulatory requirements as well. <br />. Recovery Program participants agreed to rely upon state water rights system <br />for the protection of instream flows needed to recover the endangered fishes. <br />. Ended discussion of federal "regulatory water rights." <br />. SUFFICIENT PROGRESS concept required clarification (supplemental <br />agreement in 3/93) = enough progress toward RECOVERY that the FWS can <br />rely upon its accomplishments to provide the RPA for depletion effects of <br />water projects. <br />. Regulatory experience of the Muddy Creek (Wolford Mountain) Project <br />caused Recovery Program participants to recognize the problem (3000 AF <br />of storage set aside to augment fish flows in the 15 Mile Reach). <br />. Resulted in development of RECOVERY ACTION PLAN (RIPRAP), <br />complete with target dates for accomplishments which benefit the fish and <br />lead toward "recovery." <br />. Still need to work out specific difficulties and assure consensus on (a) <br />whether progress toward "recovery" is "sufficient" and (b) relation <br />between Recovery Program accomplishments and ESA regulatory <br />requirements. <br /> <br />D. PROGRAM FUNDING. <br />. COST SHARE arrangement agreed to in 1988: $2.3M annual budget to be split <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.