WSP02092

• 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

'.'

"1

. ,

'.

.<.

UPPER BASIN WATER USERS' RECOMMENDATIONS FOR
RECOVERY OF ENDANGERED FISH
IN THE UPPER COLORADO RIVER BASIN

September 9, 1996

INTRODUCTION

On April 1, 1996, the Recovery Program reached its temporal mid-point, being halfway through
the 15 year period to achieve recovery of the endangered fishes in the Upper Colorado River
Basin. The initial years of the Program were characterized by research, with few actual on-the-
ground activities to recover endangered fish species. As we begin implementing specific actions
to recover endangered species, water users have reevaluated the Recovery Program, its goals and
accomplishments. As a result, we believe that the Recovery Program must refocus efforts on
conserving and recovering the endangered species in ways that will speed recovery and de1isting
of the endangered species. Section 4' (c)(2) of the Endangered SpeCies Act requires evaluation of
recovery every five years. Conserving and recovering endangered species under the Act (Section
3(3)) means touse'all methods and procedures necessary, including propagation, live trapping,
and transplantation: The water users' recommendations are summarized below, and described in
detail herein.

Downlisting requirements for the Colorado squawfish and humpback chub have been met, and
those species should be downlisted. Any impediments to deli sting should be identified and
addressed directly, so that species can be delisted in the near future.

The Recovery Program should immediately engage in large scale stocking ofrazorback sucker in
the Green, Colorado, and Gunnison rivers to achieve recovery populations and enhance the
possibilities for recruitment in the future. An aggressive program for recovery ofthe bonytail
chub that includes large-scale stocking should be implemented immediately. Additional hatchery
and grow out ponds need to be developed, and specific positive measures need to be taken to
reduce and eliminate nonnative fish competition and predation in critical habitat. Flow
recommendations must be consistent with the fundamental Recovery Program goal of achieving
compact development in the Upper Basin states. A realistic role for recovery should be assigned
to the 15-mile reach, which represents less than two percent of endangered fish habitat, yet
continues to consume enonnous Program resources and energy. Realistic, achievable recovery
actions, including non-flow actions, can be taken in the 15-mile reach. The Program's focus,
however, needs to be on recovering the endangered fish populations in the Colorado River main
stem from Palisade to Lake Powell.

Our specific recommendations encompass these issues, with the objective of refocusing the
Recovery Program on the critical actions necessary to recover and delist endangered fishes. To
the extent these recommendations cannot be implemented due to impedime.nts, those impediments
then become impediments to recovery and should be addressed directly by the Recovery Program.
We recognize that these recommendations will require reallocation of Program resources.

~