Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Gilbert. Hanna <br /> <br />~D~'~~_n. <br />A\~_)_~\O <br />~~ -r {f'tXO t::Rr <br /> <br />From: Doug.Krieger@state.co.us <br /> <br />Wednesday, December 24,20038:37 AM <br /> <br />SWSI (Statewide Water Supply Initiative) <br /> <br />rick. brown @ state.co. us; Steve. Puttmann @state.co.us; John. Ton ko@state.co.us; <br />David.G raf@state.co.us <br /> <br />Subject: DOW participation and input <br /> <br />Sent: <br />To: <br />Cc: <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Hi Susan, <br />SWSI participants from DOW met last week in Salida in anticipation of the next round of meetings. Up until now <br />we our participation has been somewhat curtailed as we have attempted to resolve our rote in the process. I <br />believe we now have a more focused approach and will actively assist with your process. Our expertise can be of <br />value as we discuss some key issues and move towards project permitting aspects: <br /> <br />. Native aquatic species ~ these involve those species that are already federally listed as threatened or <br />endangered, and also state-listed species that we are managing so as to prevent federal listing. <br />. Water quality - stated goals of maintaining or improving water quality standards on which wildlife species or <br />recreation depend. <br />. Recreation - particularly as related to standing water wildlife recreation and habitat. <br />. Stream flows - document stream flow and fish habitat relationships. <br /> <br />Other considerations: <br /> <br />. The DOW have a number of biologists, water quality experts, and water specialists that can assist in <br />SWSf. Although we should have a dedicated point contact for each basin, please expect that a number of <br />individuals may actual participate for our agency depending upon the issue involved so as to provide the <br />most accurate information. <br />. For the Arkansas Basin our representative as a technical advisor is still not listed (as of 11/03 summary). <br />That person should be John Tonko (john.tonko@state.co.us or 719-561-5304). <br />. There is a key document that should be utilized as the process considers reservoir levels and stream flow <br />trade-offs for potential water options for the Arkansas basin. In 1993, several agencies (Colorado Dept of <br />Natural Resources, US Bureau of Reclamation, US Bureau of Land Management, and US Forest Service) <br />signed an MOU with the goal of creating a scientific foundation for river management processes. The <br />report (Arkansas River Water Needs Assessment, edited by Roy E. Smith and Linda M. Hi/~ was <br />completed in 2000 and provides detailed information on the stream flow and reservoir level requirements <br />for commercial boating, private boating, fisheries and wildlife, and fishing. The report is not available <br />online, and is contained in a three-ring binder of about 300+ pages which I will send you. This document <br />has been used to examine the potential impacts to wildlife and recreation for the DNR Flow Program as <br />well as other water management operations (exchanges, transfers). The major chapters are: <br /> <br />-Institutional and Legal AnalYSis (CU Natural Resource Law Center) <br />-Hydrological Analysis (BLM National Applied Resource Science Center) <br />-Natural Resources Assessment (DOW, BlM) <br />-Recreational Assessment (BLM, DOW, DPOR, EDAW) <br /> <br />We appreciate the well structured process that you and CWCB have managed. Your summaries have been <br />timely, accurate and useful. Keep up the good work. The DOW looks forward to the next round of meetings and <br />assisting you with the process and deliberations. <br /> <br />Doug <br /> <br />1/21/2004 <br />