My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP06350
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
6001-7000
>
WSP06350
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:22:21 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 1:34:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.106
Description
Animas-La Plata
State
CO
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
7
Date
5/3/1990
Author
Unknown
Title
Endangered Species Information Packet- (incomplete)
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
81
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 />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Wirth/Sheftel <br />Page 4 <br />May 2, 1990 <br /> <br />III. The Role of Squawfish Plantings. <br /> <br />It is possible that the endangered species found in the San Juan River in <br />1987-1989 are the result of numerous stockings in the Colorado River. The <br />case of Colorado River Water Conservation District, Southeastern Water Con- <br />servation District, et aJ., v. James G. Watt, et al. (Andress) was filed in the <br />U .S. District Court for the District of Colorado in 1978 to remove the Endan- <br />gered Species Act as an obstacle to the construction of water resource devel- <br />opment projects on Colorado's western slope. The Districts filed the following <br />claims: <br /> <br />1) that squawfish and humpback chub were not legally determined to <br />be endangered species; <br /> <br />2) that the determinations that the squawfish and chub were endan- <br />gered were not made on adequate biological data; <br /> <br />3) that the Department of the I nterior had wrongfully concluded that <br />water impoundment structures adversely affect the squawfish and <br />chub and. therefore, the Districts' projects were being wrongfully <br />impeded or, in the alternative, assuming the water impoundment <br />facilities do harm the fish, the federal government is itself violating <br />the ESA with its dam operations; <br /> <br />4] that the adverse impacts on the squawfish and chub result from <br />stocking of non-native fishes in the Colorado River system; <br /> <br />5] that the listing of the totoaba was invalid for failure to designate <br />critical habitat; and <br /> <br />6) that the federal operation of dams on the Colorado River system has <br />adversely affected the totoaba by virtually eliminating the flow of <br />water in the Colorado River at its mouth. <br /> <br />The parties settled this case by Stipulation. The <br />Exhibit "D." In the Stipulation, the Department <br />Paragraph 5; <br /> <br />Stipulation is attached as <br />of the I nterior stated at <br /> <br />I nterior agrees that it will provide notice <br />duces any federally listed threatened <br />species into any Project area. <br /> <br />before it intro- <br />or endangered <br /> <br />The Project areas include the Animas-La Plata, Dolores and San Miguel Proj- <br />ects. <br /> <br />On October 7, 1983, the Service notified the Southwestern Water Conservation <br />District that pursuant to Paragraph 5 of the Stipulated Settlement, the Ser- <br />vice "plans to introduce approximately 100,000 Colorado River squawfish into <br />the Colorado River in the vicinity of Grand Junction, Colorado on or about <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.