10 ‎(2)‎

• Board Meeting Date: 11/18/2007
• Description: ISF Section - Uncontested 2007 Instream Flow Appropriations
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT
COLORADO STATE OFFICE
2850 YOUNGFIELD STREET
LAKEWOOD, COLORADO 80215-7093
In Reply Refer To:
7250 (CO-932)
,;~~~~'
Ms. Linda Bassi
Colorado Water Conservation Board
1313 Sherman Street, Seventh Floor
Denver, Colorado 80203
Dear Ms. Bassi:
You have verbally requested a letter from the Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
further explaining its scientific rationale for proposing an enlargement of the instream
flow water right on Pauline Creek, located in Water Division 4. The BLM's original
recommendation letter to the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) was sent in
December 2006, and the CWCB declared its intent to appropriate the recommended
enlargement at its January 2007 regular board meeting. This letter does not address the
scientific foundation behind the R2Cross methodology and the (CWCB) application of it,
because BLM believes that those discussions are best conducted between the Colorado
Division of Wildlife and the CWCB. Rather, this letter addresses the potential effects on
the stream that could be created by a continued reliance upon the current instream flow
water right.
BLM decided to evaluate the current instream flow water right on Pauline Creek because
of the Memorandum of Understanding signed between the BLM and the Colorado
Department of Natural Resources regarding management of water on federal lands. In
that memorandum, BLM indicated its intent to rely upon the State of Colorado instream
flow program, and to take cooperative actions with the Colorado Water Conservation
Board to insure that the program is meeting BLM's needs. BLM has systematically
evaluated existing instream flow water rights in the Gunnison Basin to determine whether
those rights are protective of the snowmelt hydrology and typical stream ecology in the
basin. In many cases, BLM believes that the existing instream flow rights are sufficient.
In other cases, such as Pauline Creek, BLM believes the existing instream flow right is
insufficient to insure the ecological integrity of the stream.
BLM is concerned that the current instream flow right is not reflective of the snowmelt
hydrology that drives ecological processes on Pauline Creek. snowmelt runoff flows are
important to the ecology of Pauline Creek for the following reasons: