9377

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 9377
• Author: Colorado Water Workshop.
• Title: 16th Annual Colorado Water Workshop.
• USFW Year: 1991.
• USFW - Doc Type: Western State College.
• Copyright Material: NO

It is our perception that the significance of this issue and the public
concern for the outcome have warranted the extra effort by Reclamation to
assure that sound public policy decisions are made as a result of our
activities to identify and display the impacts of the alternatives.

Many entities have become Cooperating Agencies in this EIS process under the
guidelines of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Among them are
the National Park Service, Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Indian
Affairs, Western Area Power' Administration, Arizona Game and Fish Department,
the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Hualapai Tribe, and Havasupai Tribe. with this
list of Cooperating Agencies and most of the environmental, recreational, and
public power user groups following our process intently, the effort is very
interesting and often difficult. The process is scheduled to produce a draft
EIS in the summer of 1992 followed by a final EIS in the fall of 1993. The
Secretary of the Interior will then make the decision on the future operations
of Glen Canyon Dam by processing a Record on Decision to complete the NEPA
process.

other activities within the Colorado River Basin, in addition to the ongoing
EIS processes, have begun to playa significant role in the way in which the
Colorado River system, and in fact many other western river systems, are being
operated. Among the most significant processes in that regard are the
required activities stemming from the Endangered Species Act. Withintthe
Federal responsibility for the implementation of that act, each Federal agency
proposing a Federal action must consult with the Fish and Wildlife Service on
the potential effects of the action on the endangered species which may be
involved. In many cases, the potential for impact must be offset by
significant changes to the proposed action. In the case of the consultations
in the Colorado River system, we are seeing a major change that would require
future operations of the Federal reservoirs to produ~e downstream hydrographs
that look more like (mimic) natural hydrographs. These requirements suggest
that spring flows should be much higher with resulting late season flow much
lower than under present operations. The real dilemma is that those changes
when set in place, tend to turn about a key reason most of the reservoirs were
constructed in the first place. That is to store the high spring runoff and
make it available in the late season for beneficial use. We also see
increasing concern for the fluctuation of the rivers as a result of the
peaking power operations currently being performed.

To consider the proposed and desired changes to the river operation as a
result of this new thinking and to find solutions will be a challenge for the
States and Reclamation. We believe that in many cases, there is room for a
more balanced approach which will allow the development of water resources
while protecting the environmental and recreational potential of the
resources. The challenge is to help facilitate the definition and acceptance
of the current public view and assure that decisions are made carefully.
Reclamation is making many strides to be responsive to the needs of the
States, the West, and the Nation as we do our part to help protect the
environment and operate the Colorado River system.