Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />1--" <br />--.:: <br />-.J <br />tv <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Although these appropriations for the White River and tribu- <br /> <br /> <br />taries have not yet been adjudicated, they should be recognized <br /> <br /> <br />as possible legal constraints on further diversions from these <br /> <br /> <br />streams. It is presumed that similar requests will be made to <br /> <br /> <br />the Board in the near future for instream flow appropriations <br /> <br />in the Yampa and Colorado Rivers and their tributaries. <br /> <br />4. Future Conditions, WUA (Year 2000 Levels of Depletion) and Quality <br />Ratings <br /> <br />a. <br /> <br />Transmittal of Impact Analysis <br /> <br />On March 2, 1979 the CIFSG transmitted to the Study Manager its <br /> <br />(oJOi'udo ON R <br />input to the ~inal report' covering impacts on fisheries <br /> <br /> <br />(Section I - Biological Impacts of Alternative Sources 'of Water <br /> <br /> <br />Supply) and on recreation (Section II - Economic and Social <br /> <br /> <br />Impacts of Alternative Sources of Water Supply). That input is <br /> <br /> <br />i ncl uded here as attachment J. The most recent ((4/17/79) <br /> <br /> <br />tab 1 e of contents for the fi na 1 report i ndi cates that thi 5 <br /> <br /> <br />input will appear in chapter 10, not 12 as the March 2 memo- <br /> <br />randum states. <br /> <br />b. Levels of Development and Depletion <br /> <br />As mentioned previously, the CIFSG identified present condi- <br /> <br /> <br />tions by the letters MWO, indicating a medium level of present <br /> <br /> <br />depletions exclusive of (i. e. without) any EEl development. <br /> <br />61 <br />