7732 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Qv D~R.T vJ ~ 44 ~ N 6~-~v N ~~~~~~~~ • A. RESTATEMENT QF ISSUES FQR 1. Compact Entitlement. a. worKZng,Compact Scenario would remain at the Colorado state of the Colorado River after the co the salinity reports or other exis~ has occurred? How much more devel existing budgets before realizing what are the alternatives for such instream flows would remain at the full compact development? zz What monthly instream flows ine on each major tributary act developioaent assumed in ng basin-wide water budgets, went is possible under these e full compact entitlement, evelopment, and what monthly olorada state line after such b. Potential Conflicts. Are there conflicts on the Yampa River and above the 15-Mi~.e Reach o~ the Colorado River between the alternatives for full compact development and the instream flows needed for the endangered fis ? How can such conflicts be avoided or resolved? • c. Tributary Allocations. Tp what extent can Colorado's compact entitlement be implicitly allocated among major Colorado River tributaries by instream water; rights appropriated ar acquired for the endangered fish? d. Interstate Negotiations. To what extent might interstate negotiations over the compact entitlement limit the instream water rights that need to k~e secured for the endangered fish? 2. Juniper-Cross Mountain Transacltion. i a. evelopment Allowance. Flow much of Colorado's compact entitlement would remain for futureidevelopment on the Yampa River above Maybell if the Juniper-Cross Mountain water rights were dedicated to instream use? H should existing water uses be protected from curtailment by t instream use of these water rights? How should the allowance or future development be reserved and administered? (These tissues will be addressed fn the Yampa River technical study an alternative reservoir projects.} b. Compact Consistency. Wi Juniper-Cross Mountain water right the development allowances iApntif technical study on alternative res development of Colorado's compact people of Colorado of the benPfici. Colorado's instream statute? Is s prohibited by the Maybell delivery Colorado River Compact? • 1 the dedication of the to instream use, subject to d in the Yampa River voir projects, impair the titlement, or deprive the use of water in violation of h use of these water rights equired by the 1948 Upper I l 1 1 '1 A. ILJ:"-.117r'A. II'1'1 7`a1~1 1 LJA 1 1 Ifl~.l 1 ~ . ~"1 T T:- ^ T ~ ~ .f~