Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OU2550 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />other times of the year is less ("periods of shortage"). Therefore, not all shortages must <br />be met by developing "new" water (water conservation or foregoing use). Water may be <br />reregulated by storage or groundwater recharge projects from periods of excess to periods <br />of shortage. However. according to the FWS, there is on an average annual basis a <br />shortfall of 417,000 acre-feet of water with respect to the target flows. This is a <br />significant amount of water, in a river that today has an average annual flow of about 1.1 <br />million acre-feet as measured at the Grand Island gauge in Nebraska. <br /> <br />Colorado and the other states do not accept the analysis behind the target flows as valid, <br />and under the Program Agreement retain the right to challenge those flows. However, the <br />Program Agreement offers a basis for the states to avoid costly litigation against the FWS <br />on this issue. and the FWS has agreed to continue to study whether the target flows are <br />appropriate. The Program Agreement specifically anticipates that the states and water <br />users within their borders will undertake actions to offset 130,000 - 150,000 acre-feet of <br />shortages with respect to target flows, These actions will be undertaken in accordance <br />with state law and the Program will respect the states' entitlements under interstate <br />compact and decree. <br /> <br />Tlte Land Element. Also as part of the Kingsley relicensing process, the FWS analyzed <br />the amount and type of land that should be restored to fully protect the listed species. <br />The FWS determined that about 29,000 acres of land, in ten restored and protected <br />"habitat complexes," are necessary. This aspect of the FWS's analysis is less <br />controversial. Nevertheless, Colorado believes that an appropriate balance should be <br />struck between the land elements, and water delivery and reregulation elements. <br /> <br />OUTLINE OF THE PROGRAM AGREEMENT <br /> <br />Prior to the implementation of the program, the FWS is required to consult on the <br />program under the ESA, and must comply with the National Environmental Policy Act <br />(NEPA), which may require an environmental assessment or environmental impact <br />statement describing the program, alternatives to the program, and the environmental <br />effects of those alternatives. Therefore, the Program Agreement represents the agreement <br />of the states and Interior on what will constitute the "proposed alternative" for purposes <br />of the NEPA analysis. This will allow for a full review of the proposed program, with <br />opportunities for public input. It will also allow the states and Interior to undertake <br />studies and actions necessary to get the program up and running. <br /> <br />Interior expects the NEP A process will take about three years to complete. Therefore, as <br />negotiations unfolded, the parties recognized the need to create a mechanism to allow <br />existing permits to remain in compliance with the ESA, and new federal actions to take <br />place and permits to be issued, during this period. <br /> <br />To accomplish this objective, the Program Agreement describes the obligations of the <br />parties during this three-year period. This is the major operative agreement of the <br />Program Agreement, called the "Cooperative Agreement." Attached to the Cooperative <br /> <br />5 <br />