My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PERMFILE50679
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Permit File
>
600000
>
PERMFILE50679
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 10:55:07 PM
Creation date
11/20/2007 2:35:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1980004A
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
5/13/2002
Section_Exhibit Name
APPENDICES K - P
Media Type
D
Archive
Yes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
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).
View images
View plain text
<br />• BONYTAIL CHUB <br />Little !s known about the biological requirements of the ponytail chub, as <br />the species greatly declined in numbers in the upper basin shortly after <br />1960. Until recently, FWS considered the species extirpated from the upper <br />basin; however, a recently collected specimen which exhibits many bonytail <br />characteristics could indicate a small, extant population. It is thought <br />that, should this species persist in the Colorado River, the preferred <br />habitat would be larger river reaches in the Colorado River. Conservation <br />measures outlined below will contribute to conservation efforts for the <br />bonytail chub, thus offsetting the likelihood of jeopardy for the species. <br />CONSERVATION MEASURES <br />The FWS believes that any further water depletions from the Upper Colorado <br />River Basin (UCRB) may have detrimental effects on listed fi~hes. However, <br />it is believed Chat certain management techniques can be implemented to <br />offset harmful effects from additional development, particularly in the case <br />of small depletions such as this. Impacts resulting from seemingly small <br />water developments may be subtle, but harmful in a cumulative sense. The <br />fact [hat water is depleted from the rivers reduces the flexibility of the <br />system to withstand additional water losses without detrimental impacts to <br />• essential areas. Creation of habitat favorable to introduced species is an <br />example of how seemingly minor changes in flow regimes may shift the balance <br />between survival and extinction for one or all of these listed fishes. <br />Depletions that bring present day flows down to lower levels can occur if <br />enhancement measures contained in active research and management plans are <br />funded by the project sponsor or proponent. FWS has identified certain <br />conservation measures that are currently considered necessary to maintain <br />the survival of the fish sad contribute toward their conservation. These <br />measures include monitoring known populations and attempting to locate new <br />areas containing the fish; further analyzing the potential effects of water <br />depletions and associated flow regime modifications, locating existing and <br />potential spawning and rearing areas; researching and constructing various <br />fish passage and habitat restoration features; and producing the fish in a <br />hatchery facility for research and restocking of individuals Sn existing and <br />historical habitat. <br />Since such measures will develop critically Important data on the survival <br />needs of the fish, attempt to restore essential habitat, and allow a <br />conservation program to be implemented, funding of these activities by <br />project sponsors is considered a reasonable and prudent alternative designed <br />Co compensate for or prevent the adverse effects of water depletion. Under <br />a procedure developed by the FWS, Upper Basin project sponsors are assessed <br />a proportion of the total cost needed to support these conservation <br />measures, currently estimated at approximately 25 million dollars. <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.