MULTISPECIES CONSERVATION PLAN (MSCP) EXPLAINED

By Steve Glazer, Sierra Club

Colorado River Task Force, Chair

What is the MSCP and why don't we like it? To answer these questions requires a little bit of background about endangered species issues in the Colorado River Basin. During the 1970s and 80s, four big river fish found their way on to the federal list of threatened and endangered species: The Colorado pikeminnow (formerly known as the Colorado squawfish); razorback sucker; humpback chub; and bonytailed chub. Critical habitat was finally designated throughout the entire warm-water reaches of the river only after a suit was filed by the National Wildlife Federation.

In a biological opinion (BO) issued by the US Fish and Wildlife Service, depletions from the river were considered jeopardy to the continued existence of these species. In order to come up with reasonable and prudent alternatives to jeopardy, Sec. 7 consultations began in the Upper Basin that evolved into the Upper Colorado River Recovery Program in 1988. In order to get the Upper Basin States to cooperate and participate in this effort, the Program agreed to allow continued development of entitlements under the 1922 Colorado River Compact. So, as long and sufficient progress continued to recovery the endangered fishes, the Upper Basin states were allowed to continue to build new water projects. The Glen Canyon Dam was also considered jeopardy, so the Adaptive Management Work Group was formed to help mitigate the impact of dam operations on the fishes.

Efforts to address jeopardy in the Lower Basin got off to a slower start. It wasn't until the mid 1990s that the idea of a multispecies Plan to address the needs of over 100 listed species and species of special concern was conceived. This Plan is intended to not only address the need to consult under Sec. 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) but to also provide ³take² permits under Sec. 10 of the Act and to provide ³no surprises² assurances for water users and land use activities. This would preclude the use of adaptive management and is opposed by the Sierra Club in our policies regarding the ESA.

In 1997, the Club created the Colorado River Task Force (CRTF) to better coordinate the activities of Club members working on river-related concerns throughout the entire basin. One of the first activities of the task force was to consult with other organizations who were working on issues in the basin. In early 1997, the Center for Biological Diversity and Defenders of Wildlife were participating in the MSCP, reluctantly. American Rivers had already abandoned their participation. The Club leadership had made a decision in the early 1980s that we did not have the ability to participate in any of these programs because of the time commitment needed and lack of expertise within the Club. The MSCP is envisioned as a 50-year, $150 million program.

The MSCP is governed by a Management Committee consisting of 35 voting stakeholders. Its decision-making process is by majority vote. (The other two programs on the Colorado River use consensus decision-making.) There are 5 seats allocated to environmental NGOs and 5 seats for recreational interests. There are also several technical subcommittees that meet monthly. The Management Committee is nearing the completion of a draft conservation plan that will be published for public comment.

In 1999, the Management Committee voted to only consider protective actions for critical habitat within the United States. (There are more populations of endangered species living in the river delta in Mexico that could benefit from conservation efforts than there are in the reach covered by the MSCP.) At this point, the only remaining NGOs formally withdrew from the MSCP. In June, 2000, the Club (the CRTF) joined the Defenders and the Center, along with several Mexican NGOs in filing a law suit against five federal agencies and two departments for failure to consult on dam operations in the US affecting federally listed species living in Mexico. The suit has been fully briefed and oral arguments were made late last year. We are waiting for the court's decision. Since the filing of the suit, Mexico and the Untied States have signed a Joint Declaration acknowledging the importance of the ecosystem of Colorado River Delta in Mexico. And, in December of 2000 added a Minute (amendment) to the 1944 Treaty with Mexico pledging to work cooperatively in identifying the needs of the Delta and working together on Delta restoration.

The biggest concern of the CRTF is the destruction of the Delta that was first inflicted with the construction of Glen Canyon Dam. While the reservoir behind Glen Canyon Dam was filling, no water reached the Delta and its entire ecosystem dried up and died. During the wet decade starting in the mid-1980s and flood control releases were regularly reaching the Delta, willow and cottonwood habitats regenerated along the riparian corridor of the Delta. The Interim Surplus Criteria, adopted last year to help California to a ³soft landing² while implementing its 4.4 Plan to reduce its over-use of the Colorado River to within its Compact entitlement of 4.4 million acre feet per year, threatens to dry up the Delta once again.

At the Colorado River Water Users annual meeting in December, the Assistant Secretary of Interior for Water and Science, Bennett Raley, formally asked the environmental community to rejoin the MSCP. We are currently drawing up conditions under which we would consider joining this process. Some of the conditions include: improve procedures for equitable decision-making; provide for habitat protection activities in Mexico; revisit decision to utilize Section 10; revisit conservation activities being proposed and expand interim conservation measures; and funding staff positions and expenses for the NGOs. For more information about the activities of the CRTF read our Colorado River Report at sierraclub.org/rcc/southwest/ Be prepared to help weigh in on the draft EIS for the MSCP.