Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />July 23,1999, stated that: "In comparison to Ridges Basin, impacts within the Pine River <br />drainage (where the majority of land would be purchased under RA6) would present impacts of <br />far greater magnitude, due to differences in diversity of habitats of the two locations. The Pine <br />River Valley possesses a far greater diversity of vegetation and therefore has a higher wildlife <br />value, than Ridges Basin." With this in mind, RA6 was modified to ameliorate environmental <br />impacts and to broaden the functions it would provide. Even with these refinements, several <br />concerns arose about the practicability ofRA6, in the areas of: (I) socioeconomic issues; (2) <br />changes in water use; (3) timing; and (4) Indian Trust Assets. It was determined that RA 4 would <br />have less risk/uncertainty in providing settlement benefits and fewer overall impacts to wetlands <br />and endangered species (southwestern willow flycatcher habitat) than RA6. Therefore, RAA was <br />determined to be the least environmentally damaging practical alternative under the 404(b)( 1) <br />guidelines. <br /> <br />In its letter of June 23, 2000, the Environmental Protection Agency informed the Department that <br />the 404(b)( 1) analysis was consistent with the 404(b)( 1) guidelines and that it accepted the <br />Department's determination that RA4 was the least environmentally damaging alternative under <br />the Clean Water Act. EP A also concurred that RA4 should not result in signiticant water quality <br />degradation. <br /> <br />E. Endangered Species Act Compliance <br /> <br />Reclamation entered into consultation with the Fish and Wildlife Service on the proposed agency <br />action of implementing RA4. In its Biological Opinion for the project, the Fish and Wildlife <br />Service concurred in all the findings contained in Reclamation's Biological Assessment and <br />included conservation measures which Reclamation has adopted. The Biological Opinion <br />concluded: <br /> <br />"After reviewing the current status of the Colorado pikeminnow, razorback <br />sucker, and bald eagle, the environmental baseline of the action area, the effects of <br />the proposed action and the cumulative effects, it is the Service's biological <br />opinion that the Animas-La Plata Project, as described in the Biological Opinion, <br />is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the Colorado pike minnow or <br />razorback sucker, and the proposed project is not likely to destroy or adversely <br />modify designated critical habitat. The Service also concludes that the proposed <br />project is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the bald eagle. This <br />conclusion is based on the description of the proposed action contained in this <br />biological opinion, with full implementation of the conservation measures." <br /> <br />Agreed to conservation measures are included as Appendix I to this ROD. <br /> <br />9 <br />