Arkansas Basin_Water Supply and Needs

• Basin Roundtable: Arkansas
• Title: Water Supply & Needs Report for the Arkansas Basin
• Date: 6/1/2006
• Author: CDM
• Basin Roundtables - Doc Type: Needs Assessment Documents

I-I ~.........
l r'L~'"
," .... _ J---- ....i.

Section 6
Non-Consumptive Water Supply Needs
in the Arkansas Basin

~~ ,Arkansas
LB.
aSln

In addition to the projected increase in demand for water
to serve consumptive uses as described in Section 5,
demand for water to serve environmental and
recreational needs is expected to increase as well.
Recreational and environmental water needs are
generally in-channel flow-based and non-consumptive.
This section provides a synopsis of the input received
during the SWSI process from environmental and
recreational interest groups as a possible starting point
for defining environmental and recreational flow goals.

Conc~pts for Environmental
Flow Management

While flow enhancement for environmental and
recreational uses was identified by many SWSI
participants as being important, few Identified Projects
and Processes, aside from river compact deliveries and
the CWCB's instream flow program, directly address flow
enhancements beyond statutory legal requirements.

6.1

One concept for environmental and recreational flow
management brought forth by environmental and
recreational interest group representatives in SWSI was
the "Conserve, Protect, and Restore" (CPR) approach.
The "Conserve" component is centered on keeping
currently "healthy" - both in terms of quality and quantity
- rivers healthy. The "Protect" component suggested by
the interest groups includes keeping threatened but
currently healthy reaches whole, or as close to whole as
possible. The "Restore" component suggested by the
interest group representatives revolves around
restoration of dry, low-flow, or low-quality segments.
Project re-operations and ditch lining are two possible
strategies that could be employed.

Environmental and recreational interest groups
suggested that in characterizing environmental water
needs, a two-step approach could be implemented:

. Identify and locate critical water-dependent species
and natural systems

. Assess the environmental demands (or ecological
flow needs) of those systems

o :\SHAWN\ARKANSAS\S6 _ARKANSAS. DOC

Key sources for information for water-dependent species
and systems might include:

. CDOW
. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP)
. Colorado Water Trust
. The Nature Conservancy Ecoregional Plans
. Colorado River Endangered Fish Recovery Programs

It was also suggested that a model could be developed
to determine environmental or instream needs of these
communities by identifying integral components of the
flow regime such as:

. Base flows
. Normal high flows
. Droug ht and flood cond itions
. Interannual variability

6.2. Recreational and

Environmental Information

6.2.1 Flow Considerations

There are no CWCB decreed instream flow rights on the
mainstem of the Arkansas River. Flow rights on
tributaries in the basin can be found at
http://cwcb.state.co.us/isf/Downloads/I ndex. htm.

Above Pueblo Reservoir, the following flow
considerations are of note:

FrvinQoan-Arkansas Proiect
Via the Fry-Ark Project's operating plan, a minimum flow
of 66.0 cubic feet per second (cfs) was established for
the Arkansas River at Granite, which is the only legal
minimum flow requirement on the mainstem of the
Arkansas (Smith and Hill 2000).

Turquoise Lake and Twin Lakes ManaQement
A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was executed
with the USFS on July 1, 1976, concerning the transfer of
lands acquired by U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR) to
the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) at Sugar Loaf Dam and
Turquoise Lake. A provision of the MOU states that BOR

CDIVI

6-1

a
DEPARTlI.lENT OF
NATUHAL
RESOURCES

1I....,~~!:.'.~!.:.'5-~';'.,
'5~:..:r: .' ,?'~;_

::II(; :~

~ ~, 1

· I,r( ;;2,;