Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0026H <br /> <br />The RIP parricipants intend the RIP also to provide the reasonable and prudent <br />alternatives which avoid the likely destruction or adverse modification of crirical <br />habitat, to the same extent as it does to avoid the likelihood of jeopardy. Once <br />critical habitat for the endangered fishes is formally designated, the RIP parricipants <br />will make any necessary amendments to the RIPRAP to fulfill such intent. <br /> <br />2. The RIP is intended to offset both the direct and depletion impacts of historic <br />projects occurring ptior to January 22, 1988 (the date when the Cooperative <br />Agreement for the RIP was executed) if such offsets are needed to recovet the fishes. <br />Under certain circumstances, historic projects may be subject to consultation under <br />Section 7 of the ESA. An increase in depletions from a historic project occurring <br />after January 22, 1988, will be subject to the depletion charge. Except for the <br />circumstances described in item 1 I below, depletion charges or other measures will <br />not be required from historic projects which undergo Section 7 consultation in the <br />future. <br /> <br />3. The Bureau of Reclamation (BR) and the Western Area Power Administration will <br />operate projects authorized and funded pursuant to Federal reclamation law <br />consistent with its responsibilities under Section 7 of the ESA and with any existing <br />contracts. No depletion charge will be required on depletions from BR projects as <br />long as BR continues its contributions to the RIP's annual budget. <br /> <br />4. The FWS will assess the impacts of projects that require Section 7 consultation ,md <br />determine if progress toward recovery has been sufficient for the RIP to serve as a <br />reasonable and prudent alternative. The FWS will use accomplishments under the <br />RIP as its measure of sufficient progress. The FWS will also consider whether the <br />probable success of the RIP is compromised as a result of a specifiC depletion or the <br />cumulative effect of depletions. Supporr activities (funding, research, information <br />and education, etc.) in the RIP contribute to sufficient progress to the extent that <br />they help achieve a measurable population response, a measurable improvement in <br />habitat for the fishes, legal protection of flows needed for recovery, or a reduction in <br />the threat of immediate extinction. Generally, sufficient progress will be evaluated <br />separately for the Colorado and Green River subbasins (but not individual <br />rributaries within each subbasin). However, the FWS will give due consideration to <br />progress thtoughout the upper basin in evaluating sufficienr progress. <br /> <br />5. <br /> <br />If sufficient progress is being achieved, biological opinions will idenrify the acrivities <br />and accomplishments of the RIP that support It serving as a reasonable and prudent <br />alternative, <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />6. If sufficient progress is not being achieved, biological opinions for new and historIC <br />projects will be written to identify which action(s) in the RIPRAP must be <br />completed to avoid jeopardy. Specific recovery actions will be implemented <br />according to the schedule identified in the RIPRAP. The FWS will confer with the <br />Management Committee on the identification of these actions within established <br />timeframes for the Section 7 consultation. For histonc projects, these actions will <br /> <br />Appendix A - Section 7 Agreement <br /> <br />A.3 <br />