Difference between revisions of "The Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Programs"

From AquaPedia Case Study Database
Jump to: navigation, search
[unchecked revision][unchecked revision]
Line 17: Line 17:
 
|Water Project=
 
|Water Project=
 
|Agreement=
 
|Agreement=
 +
|Summary=Over eight million people in one of the United States’ most water stressed regions depend on water from the Upper Colorado River Basin, including the San Juan River. From 1960 to 1990, the Upper Basin states experienced large population growth. During the same period, Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973 protecting imperiled species. (Endangered Species Act of 1973).
 +
 +
The passage of the ESA along with increased pressures on the basin’s resources set the stage for potential conflict over imperiled fish species in the river systems among the region’s water users, environmentalists, and the government. In 1983, FWS drafted a proposal to protect four endangered species in the Colorado River: the Colorado pikeminnow, the humpback chub, the bonytail, and the razorback sucker. The threat posed by potential ESA-related lawsuits set the stage for the creation of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Programs.
 +
 +
Stakeholder groups composed of water users, government agencies, Native American tribes, Upper Basin states, and environmentalists created the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Programs in 1988 and 1992 respectively. These Programs allow water users the right to continue to develop their legal water rights and construct water projects while protecting and recovering the fishes through flow management, habitat restoration, hatchery releases, control of nonnatives, beneficial capital projects, and research into the species’ natural histories.
 +
 +
The Programs have stabilized and increased the populations of all four species, though only two of the four species will likely be delisted by the official end of the program in 2023. At the same time, the Programs have facilitated the development of 2,500 water projects by granting them automatic compliance through the Programs, instead of necessitating project-specific ESA review.
 +
 +
The Programs have achieved success for a variety of reasons. The initial negotiation environment encouraged the parties to collaborative on creative solutions with limited alternatives to this approach. The Programs have achieved ongoing success due to working transparently, openly engaging stakeholders across sectors, focusing on science-based results, adaptively managing the program, fostering grassroots support and turning this into political support, providing on the ground funding, simplifying water project development, and establishing trust and relationships among the involved stakeholders over more than two decades.
 
|Topic Tags=
 
|Topic Tags=
 +
|Refs=2016 - 2017 Highlights: Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Program and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program(Issue brief). (2017). Retrieved from http://www.coloradoriverrecovery.org/general-information/general-publications/briefingbook/2017-BriefingBook.pdf
 +
106–392, 106th Cong. (2000) (enacted).
 +
Benke, A., & Cushing, C. (2005). Rivers of North America. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Acad. Press.
 +
Brooks, Richard Oliver, Ross Jones, and Ross A. Virginia. (2002). Law and ecology: the rise of the ecosystem regime. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, Print.
 +
Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region. (2008). The Law of the River. Retrieved 2017, from https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g1000/lawofrvr.html
 +
Chart, T. (2017, April 28). Tom Chart Case Interview [Telephone interview].
 +
Colorado’s Water Needs. (n.d.). Retrieved 2017, from http://cwcb.state.co.us/water-management/water-supply-planning/Pages/ColoradosWaterSupplyNeeds.aspx
 +
Endangered Species Act of 1973, § 93–205 (1973).
 +
"Endangered Species Act of 1973." Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 (1973): 1-41. Text of the Endangered Species Act. Retrieved 2017.
 +
"Endangered Species | Animal Welfare Institute." Animal Welfare Institute. Animal Welfare Institute. Retrieved 2017, from http://awionline.org/content/endangered-species.
 +
"Endangered Species Act Penalty Schedule 16 U.S.C. §1561 et seq.." NOAA. national oceanic and atmospheric administration. (2001). Retrieved 2017 from www.gc.noaa.gov/schedules/6-ESA/EnadangeredSpeciesAct.pdf.
 +
ESA Basics: More than 30 Years of Conserving Endangered Species. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Retrieved 2017, from www.fws.gov/endangered/esa-library/pdf/ESA_basics.pdf
 +
Flemming, P. (2017, April 27). Peter Flemming Case Interview [Telephone interview].
 +
Kammerer , J. (1990). Largest Rivers in the United States(U.S.A., Department of the Interior , USGS). Retrieved 2017, from https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/1987/ofr87-242/
 +
Luecke, D., Pitts, T., Kantola, A., Karas, C., & Palmer, C. (2003, May 29). Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Program(Issue brief). Retrieved https://www.usbr.gov/uc/rm/amp/amwg/mtgs/03may29/Attach_05.pdf
 +
Milstein, M. (2009). 6 Radical Solutions for U.S. Southwest's Peak Water Problem. Popular Mechanics.
 +
Petersen, Shannon. Acting for endangered species: the statutory ark. Lawrence, Kan.: University Press of Kansas, 2002. Print.
 +
Pitts, T. (2010, October). The Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Program: A Success Story. Irrigation Leader, 24-27.
 +
Pitts, T. (2011, June). The San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program: An Ongoing Success Story. Irrigation Leader, 2(6), 8-11.
 +
Pitts, T. (2012, April). Home-Grown Solutions Resolve Conflicts with ESA . Irrigation Leader, 12-13.
 +
San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program. (n.d.). Retrieved 2017, from https://www.fws.gov/southwest/sjrip/index.cfm
 +
MacDonnell, L. (2017, May 3). Larry MacDonnell Case Interview [Telephone interview].
 +
Pitts, T. (2017, May 4). Tom Pitts Case Interview [Telephone interview].
 +
Suckling and Taylor. (2006). The Endangered Species Act at Thirty. Goble, Dale, J. Michael Scott, and F. W. Davis (Ed.). Washington: Island Press. Print.
 +
The Colorado River Basin: An Overview (Rep.). (2012). Retrieved 2017, from State of the Rockies Project website: https://www.coloradocollege.edu/dotAsset/e57e7c73-2983-477b-a05d-de0ba0b87a00.pdf
 +
Treese , C. (2017, April 26). Chris Treese Case Interview [Telephone interview].
 +
Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Recovery program. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.coloradoriverrecovery.org/
 +
U.S.A., Department of the Interior, USGS. (2014). Retrieved 2017, from https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2004/3062/
 
|External Links=
 
|External Links=
 
|Case Review={{Case Review Boxes
 
|Case Review={{Case Review Boxes

Revision as of 19:03, 21 May 2017

{{#var: location map}}


Case Description
Loading map...
Geolocation: 37° 11' 7.9289", -110° 53' 37.6294"
Total Population 88,000,000 millionmillion
Total Area 280,000280,000 km²
108,108 mi²
km2
Climate Descriptors Arid/desert (Köppen B-type), alpine
Predominent Land Use Descriptors conservation lands
Important Uses of Water Agriculture or Irrigation, Domestic/Urban Supply, Hydropower Generation, Other Ecological Services

Summary

Over eight million people in one of the United States’ most water stressed regions depend on water from the Upper Colorado River Basin, including the San Juan River. From 1960 to 1990, the Upper Basin states experienced large population growth. During the same period, Congress passed the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 1973 protecting imperiled species. (Endangered Species Act of 1973).

The passage of the ESA along with increased pressures on the basin’s resources set the stage for potential conflict over imperiled fish species in the river systems among the region’s water users, environmentalists, and the government. In 1983, FWS drafted a proposal to protect four endangered species in the Colorado River: the Colorado pikeminnow, the humpback chub, the bonytail, and the razorback sucker. The threat posed by potential ESA-related lawsuits set the stage for the creation of the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Programs.

Stakeholder groups composed of water users, government agencies, Native American tribes, Upper Basin states, and environmentalists created the Upper Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Programs in 1988 and 1992 respectively. These Programs allow water users the right to continue to develop their legal water rights and construct water projects while protecting and recovering the fishes through flow management, habitat restoration, hatchery releases, control of nonnatives, beneficial capital projects, and research into the species’ natural histories.

The Programs have stabilized and increased the populations of all four species, though only two of the four species will likely be delisted by the official end of the program in 2023. At the same time, the Programs have facilitated the development of 2,500 water projects by granting them automatic compliance through the Programs, instead of necessitating project-specific ESA review.

The Programs have achieved success for a variety of reasons. The initial negotiation environment encouraged the parties to collaborative on creative solutions with limited alternatives to this approach. The Programs have achieved ongoing success due to working transparently, openly engaging stakeholders across sectors, focusing on science-based results, adaptively managing the program, fostering grassroots support and turning this into political support, providing on the ground funding, simplifying water project development, and establishing trust and relationships among the involved stakeholders over more than two decades.



Natural, Historic, Economic, Regional, and Political Framework

Issues and Stakeholders

Conflict between maintaining water flows and habitat for legally protected endangered fish and water users with legal rights to water consumption in the Upper Colorado Basin

NSPD: Water Quantity, Water Quality, Ecosystems
Stakeholder Types: Federated state/territorial/provincial government, Sovereign state/national/federal government, Non-legislative governmental agency, Environmental interest, Industry/Corporate Interest

Water users want to maintain their legal rights to the Colorado and San Juan Rivers’ water resources. At the same time, the federal Endangered Species Act, supported by environmental groups, mandates that four protected species within the rivers have adequate water flows and quality and protected habitat.


Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight

What is an ASI?

Individuals may add their own Analysis, Synthesis, and Insight (ASI) to a case. ASI sub-articles are protected, so that each contributor retains authorship and control of their own content. Edit the case to add your own ASI.

Learn more

No ASI articles have been added yet for this case








References

2016 - 2017 Highlights: Upper Colorado Endangered Fish Program and San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program(Issue brief). (2017). Retrieved from http://www.coloradoriverrecovery.org/general-information/general-publications/briefingbook/2017-BriefingBook.pdf 106–392, 106th Cong. (2000) (enacted). Benke, A., & Cushing, C. (2005). Rivers of North America. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Acad. Press. Brooks, Richard Oliver, Ross Jones, and Ross A. Virginia. (2002). Law and ecology: the rise of the ecosystem regime. Aldershot, Hants, England: Ashgate, Print. Bureau of Reclamation, Lower Colorado Region. (2008). The Law of the River. Retrieved 2017, from https://www.usbr.gov/lc/region/g1000/lawofrvr.html Chart, T. (2017, April 28). Tom Chart Case Interview [Telephone interview]. Colorado’s Water Needs. (n.d.). Retrieved 2017, from http://cwcb.state.co.us/water-management/water-supply-planning/Pages/ColoradosWaterSupplyNeeds.aspx Endangered Species Act of 1973, § 93–205 (1973). "Endangered Species Act of 1973." Department of the Interior U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1 (1973): 1-41. Text of the Endangered Species Act. Retrieved 2017. "Endangered Species