Laserfiche WebLink
Colorado River Recovery Implementation Program-- Page 3 <br />. Water acquisition for the endangered fishes <br />Group Memory, April 6, 1992 <br />CATEGORY I <br />A. Uncertainty Issues (includes #3,4,& 25) <br />B. Compact Issues (Development vs. Instream flows for fish) #5 <br />(A) , (B) , (C) , (G) , (H) . <br />C. Interim Flows (8 A & B) <br />D. "Sufficient Progress" Issues <br />E. Support: Grassroots/Agency (#24). <br />Refine the Category I problems into addressable problems: <br />IA. (3,4,& 25) "Uncertainty Issues" <br />How can CWCB address uncertainty in the relationship <br />between flow and population and/or habitat? <br />• How can better communication be achieved on instream flow <br />needs and the criteria for evaluating those needs? <br />IB. "Compact issues" - Development vs. in-stream flows. <br />1#5, (A) , (B) , (C) , (6~, (H~ <br />How can potential conflicts be resolved between full <br />compact development and instream flows needed for <br />endangered fish? <br />Step (1): Identify Colorado's compact entitlement and/or <br />requirements on a stream-by-stream basis. <br />Step (2): Until step (1) is complete, identify what instream <br />flow protection is possible. Is a concern that <br />instream water rights secured under the Recovery <br />Program will implicitly allocate compact flows <br />amoung tributaties an impediment to securing <br />instream flow rights for endangered fish? <br />Step (3): When step #1 is complete, determine whether full <br />development of Colorado's compact entitlement <br />presents an impediment to provision and protection <br />• of instream flows for benefit of fish in 15 Mile <br />Reach and Yampa. <br />