Laserfiche WebLink
<br />High Country Citizens' Alliance <br /> <br /> <br />3/5/04 <br /> <br />Rick Brown <br />Colorado Walar Conservation Board <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />Dear Rick, <br /> <br />I am writing as a foHowup to our Jast Gunnison Basin Roundtable meeting. You presented <br />information about consumptive use in the Gunnison Basin that J perceive as significantly <br />under-estimated. I ask that you review your data to see if maybe you Jeft something out. If <br />not, I wouJd like to talk to you about your assumptions. I would also like to reinforce what <br />Kathleen Curry said about the CU coefficient being underestjmated for the upper part of the <br />basin. The UGRWCD has been funding a CU study conducted by CSU Extension and the <br />final report should be available soon which suggested that high altitude hay crop <br />consumption is closer to 210 af/a that 1 .3 af/a. <br /> <br />At our last meeting, you suggested you will take into account current and future <br />environmental and recreational needs but did not present us with any information about how <br />you would do this other than to use the current'ISF and RICD filings as a baseline~ We need <br />to have a group discussion about how to determine these needs and what alternatives can <br />be identified to address these needs. The Colorado Water Trust maps (submitted at the last <br />meeting) and the CWCBts 5-year ISF workplan are obvious tools to help initiate this <br />discussion. Increased population wiJl undoubtedly create new and increased demands for <br />environmental and recreational frows. Incorporating environmental suppries in new projects is <br />not the only alternative to be assessed. Water use efficiency improvements should be <br />quantified to provide an alternative to the need to build new projects to meet current and <br />future needs. How 58 156 can be utilized to provide supplies to improve environmental <br />conditions is another alternative that shoufd be incorporated. <br /> <br />There is also a need to discuss and recognize that R2Cross is an ineffective methodology to <br />define environmental protection. Flows that are quantified using R2 Cross are only intended <br />to protect base frow needs. Healthy aquatic ecosystems need natural variability that is not <br />included in baseline protection I We must start ta'king about and providing for protection of a <br />naturar hydrograph that properly functjoning systems rely on. <br /> <br />J am disturbed that although you may have good intentions, your process of alJowing <br />proponents to identify and rank ill-conceived projects may be upsetting and undermining <br />coHaborative planning processes that have been ongoing in our basin~ These coUaborative <br />processes have focused on finding common ground and compromise. Your process seems to <br />have the effect of polarizing the stakehorders by jdentifying projects that have been on the back <br />burner for some time either because they have aJready been determined to be unfeasible or <br />significant hurdles impede progress on them. Identifying them anew onry facHitates new <br />P.O. BOX 459, CRESTED BUTTE, CO 81224 <br />970 349R6646 (voice & fax), e-mail: steve@hccaonline.org <br /> <br />I <br />~ <br />