7732

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7732
• Author: Center for Public-Private Sector Cooperation, U. o. C.
• Title: Recommendations on the Legal, Policy, and Institutional Issues Related to Instream Flow Protection in Colorado.
• USFW Year: 1993.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

i
any agreement between the Natianal~Park Service and the Bureau of
Reclamation over the use of Aspinall storage water to maintain
• instream flows in the Black Canyon,j affeot the use of Aspinall
water to meet endangered fish need? Does the present
authorizing legislation for the Aspinall Unit permit the use of
Aspinall water to meet endangered fish needs? Does the.
Endangered Species Act authorize such use of Aspinall water?
I
5. Quantifieatian of Flaw Needs.'
a. Legal Standards. What isi the standard under the
Endangered Species Act for determining how much water to dedicate
to the endangered fish? The amount needed for full recavery?
The amount needed for survival., but not recovery? It is possible
to acquire instream water rights under the standards set by
Colorado's statute, that also meetlIthe standards set by the
Endangered Species Act. To what extent may the CWCB consider the
standards set by the Endangered Species Act in balancing instream
flow protection and water developm nt?
b. Technical Uncertainty_Abaut..In.stream Flow Needs. How
does the CWCB proceed in light of technical uncertainty about
instream flow needs? is the CWCB precluded from acquiring an
instream water rights if it is not feasible to establish a
precise fish population response fair every increment of flow
need? Can the CWCB rely on professional judgement in quantifying
instream flow needs? To what extent has the CWCB already relied
• on professional judgement to quantify flow needs? can the CWCB
rely on the professional judgement Hof FWS biological experts?
Must the CWCB rely on any one metho~id of flow quantification, or
may the CWCB apply ane method that 'is suited to a particular
river reach and an entirely different one that is suited to
another, or may the CWCB even draw !on conflicting methods and
data fvr the same reach? Is it poesible for the cwCB to acquire
an "interim" instream flow right subject to future review and
refinement based on neri data? Would such interim protection
satisfy the mandates of the Endangered Species Act2
c. LTnaprta int.Y_ 1#hnttfi F'»t»rp Water npvpl onment. In
balancing instream flew protection ;and water development, how
does the CWCB weigh future water development that is highly or
moderately uncertain, ar is not clearly necessary far f1~ 1. l
compact development?
• 3