My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2009-09-18_REVISION - C1981010
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Revision
>
Coal
>
C1981010
>
2009-09-18_REVISION - C1981010
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 3:55:34 PM
Creation date
9/21/2009 11:50:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
C1981010
IBM Index Class Name
REVISION
Doc Date
9/18/2009
Doc Name
Decision Extension Request (Emailed)
From
Carl Johnston
To
DRMS
Type & Sequence
PR6
Email Name
JDM
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
Plan items listed as part of the proposed action (Green River Action Plan: Yampa and <br />Little Snake rivers) in this opinion are not implemented within the required timeframes. <br />Also, the analysis for this biological opinion assumed implementation of the Green River <br />Mainstem Action Plan of the RIPRAP because the Colorado pikeminnow and razorback <br />sucker that occur in the Yampa River use the Green River and are considered one <br />population. The essential elements of the Green River Plan are as follows: 1) provide <br />and protect instream flows; 2) restore floodplain habitat; 3) reduce impacts of nonnative <br />fishes; 4) augment or restore populations; and 5) monitor populations and conduct <br />research to support recovery actions. The analysis for the non jeopardy determination of <br />the Yampa Plan that includes about 53,000 AF/year of new water depletions from the <br />Yampa River Basin relies on the Recovery Program to provide and protect flows on the <br />Green River. Specifically, the analysis for this biological opinion assumed operation of <br />Flaming Gorge Dam to meet the flow recommendations according to the Record of <br />Decision on the Flaming Gorge Dam Operations environmental impact statement (EIS). <br />The Service recognizes that the RIPRAP is an adaptive management plan that is modified <br />according to additional information and changing priorities. The plan is reviewed <br />annually and updated when necessary. The required timeframes include changes in <br />timing approved by means of normal procedures of the Recovery Program. In 2006, and <br />every 2 years thereafter, for the life of the Recovery Program, the Service and the <br />Recovery Program will review implementation of the RIPRAP actions to determine <br />timely compliance with applicable schedules. <br />Also, the analysis for this biological opinion assumed impacts to peals flows based on <br />anticipated future uses of water, if water is used in a substantially different timing regime <br />that adversely affects endangered fishes in a way not considered in this opinion, then <br />reinitiation of consultation is required. The Recovery Program will monitor all new <br />water projects that deplete more than 1-00 AF/year to determine their impacts to peak <br />flows on the Yampa River. In addition, the Recovery Program will monitor projects <br />individually depleting 100 AF/year or less in cumulative increments of 3,000 AF/year to <br />determine their impacts to peak flows. <br />4. The Service lists new species or designates new or additional critical habitat, where the <br />level or pattern of depletions covered under this opinion may have an adverse impact on <br />___ the-newly-isted_species_or-nabitat.-J£the_species_or_habitatma_y_be_adversel_y_affected b-y--- - <br />depletions, the Service will reinitiate consultation on the programmatic biological opinion <br />as required by its section 7 regulations. The Service will first determine whether the <br />Recovery Program can avoid such impact or can be amended to avoid the likelihood of <br />jeopardy and/or adverse modification of critical habitat for such depletion impacts. If the <br />Recovery Program can avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or adverse modification of <br />critical habitat no additional recovery actions for individual projects would be required, if <br />the avoidance actions are included in the Recovery Action Plan. If the Recovery <br />Program is not likely to avoid the likelihood of jeopardy and/or adverse modification of <br />critical habitat then the Service will reinitiate consultation and develop reasonable and <br />prudent alternatives.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.