Suit Seeks to Save Colorado River Species, Habitat

SAN DIEGO —  A coalition of environmentalists Wednesday sued to force the federal government to be more aggressive in its efforts to save the endangered wildlife and beleaguered habitat of the Colorado River delta where the river flows south toward Mexico and the Gulf of California.

The ecological health of the once lush delta at the border has declined sharply as the flow of water has withered because of massive diversions by seven thirsty states upstream along the river’s winding path.

The U.S. government, working with California, Arizona and Nevada, has launched a program to save 90 or more species by repairing the habitat along the banks of the river from Lake Mead behind Hoover Dam to below Yuma, Ariz. The program is akin to the state and federal effort to save the sickly Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in California.

In their lawsuit, filed in Washington, the environmentalists assert that the program for the lower Colorado River is crippled because it does not even consider the need to send more water downstream. Indeed, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, to get cooperation from the states for the restoration program, agreed not to propose reducing how much water states are using.

The lawsuit alleges that by not considering water usage along the river in developing the species conservation program, the government is violating the federal Endangered Species Act.

“Today’s action is a landmark step in rectifying the biological, ethical and legal disaster wrought upon this part of Mexico by the United States,” said Rodger Schlickeisen, president of the Washington-based Defenders of Wildlife.

Issues of how much water can be pulled by individual states from the Colorado River are among the most politically volatile and heavily litigated in the western United States. Residents along the Colorado River once defended their water rights with shotguns; now they use lawyers and politicians.

The environmentalists believe that the much-touted Lower Colorado River Multi-Species Program is doomed because the delta’s major problem is lack of water due to diversions and dams.

“When the time comes to decide between existing management diverting every last drop of river water or leaving some for wildlife, it’s a safe bet the water agencies running the species program will favor the status quo,” said David Hogan, river programs coordinator for the San Diego County-based Center for Biological Diversity.

But Sam Spiller, Lower Colorado River coordinator for the Fish and Wildlife Service, said the environmentalists are selling the multi-species program short. The federal government had hoped to head off the lawsuit by including the environmentalists in the negotiating process leading to development of a restoration plan.

Spiller said he is confident that, even without calling for diversions of water to be reduced, the program will be able to save some of the most endangered species in North America, such as the Southwestern willow flycatcher, the bonytail chub and the occult little brown bat.

Spiller said he hopes program officials will finish their studies by mid-2002 so that work can begin. No price tag has been determined.

By some estimates, the delta wetlands have declined by 90% in acreage since construction in the 1930s of Hoover Dam, which provided the water and electrical power that made it possible for Las Vegas, Phoenix and Los Angeles to grow and prosper.

The environmentalists would like an arrangement similar to that contained in the latest version of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta rescue plan: a so-called “environmental account,” through which a quantity of water is dedicated to environmental uses.

But that would take an agreement among Colorado River water users in the seven states to voluntarily reduce their diversion of the water.

The 1995 agreement, however, between the federal government, Nevada, Arizona and California says that the restoration will “incorporate current water diversions and power production and optimize opportunities for future water and power development.”