WSP04888 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Appendix ill The Endangered Species Act and the Colorado Squawfish The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), was enacted to protect fish, wildlife, and plant species whose survival is in jeopardy. The Secretary of the Interior, through the Fish and Wildlife Service, is responsible for making such designations for land and freshwater species, such as the endangered Colorado squawfish.' Under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act, federal agencies-if they determine that their actions may affect any designated species--are required to consult with the Service before beginning construction on proposed projects to determine whether a project would likely "jeopardize the continued existence of' any endangered species.2 The act also provides a mechanism for exempting projects from the act's requirements. Consultation Under the Endangered Species Act The act's requirement to consult concerns actions taken by federal agencies that "reasonably would be expected, directly or indirectly, to reduce appreciably the likelihood of both the survival and recovery of a listed species in the wild by reducing the reproduction, numbers, or distribution of that species." Section 7 of the act represents a congressional design to give endangered species priority over the primary missions offederal agencies.3 When proposing a project, the consulting agency bears the burden of proof to demonstrate that its actions would not likely jeopardize the species and must determine whether its actions may affect the species; if so, it must request consultation with the Service. The Service, after reviewing the proposal's potential effects on the species, documents its determination in a "biological opinion." If the Service finds that the proposed project would likely jeopardize an endangered species, it issues a "jeopardy" biological opinion. The consulting agency can then either abandon the project or develop, with the Service's concurrence, a "reasonable and prudent alternative" (called hereinafter the "alternative") that modifies the proposed project to avoid jeopardizing the endangered species. The biological opinion and the alternative, as well as the agencies' decisions, must be based on the best scientific and commercial information that is available.4 Under the Endangered Species Act's implementing regulations, IFor 8. species to be designated as endangere~ it must be in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range (the area where the species naturally occurs). 'This requirement applies to projects whose construction began after November 10, 1978. "IV A v. 1Iill, 437 D,S, 153, 185 (1978). 4In this context, the word "commercial" refers specifically to trade infonnation (e.g., salmon harvests), not to nonscientific infonnation in general. Page 16 GAOIRCED.96-1 AnlmaB-La Plata Projeet ! ~ 7'\ ,~ ~ J;i (.,' :.( , , ",1t' l:". '.) :.>