Laserfiche WebLink
spread of agencies and interests will make selection of a preferred <br />alternative a difficult task. The group includes a variety of Federal <br />agencies, the State of Arizona, and four tribes. The varying statutory <br />responsibilities of each agency are significant... with many agency goals and <br />missions in conflict with each other. Public constituencies for each agency <br />add another dimension to the mix. <br />The EIS team is recommending a short list, or range, of alternatives to <br />the Cooperating Agencies. They, in turn, will choose either a range or <br />possibly a single preferred alternative. <br />One thing is certain, change of some nature is coming to Glen Canyon <br />Dam. But, as we come down the home stretch on this EIS we will see some <br />interesting problems. To date, most of the conservation organizations have <br />united in a general concern and approach for the EIS. However, now they must <br />begin to take a close look at how any alternatives will affect their specific <br />agency programs. Are flows that benefit endangered fish good for recreation? <br />Are they good for the trout fishery? What are the impacts on power generation <br />and water conservation? You begin to get the picture of how difficult the <br />task will be. <br />The final issue I'd like to touch on tonight concerns efforts by the <br />Bureau of Reclamation, the National Park Service, Bureau of Land Management, <br />and the Colorado Water Conservation Board to provide water for long-term <br />protection of the Gunnison River streamflows throughout the Black Canyon of <br />Gunnison National Monument and the Gunnison Gorge. <br />The agencies are studying alternatives to develop a water service <br />contract to deliver water from the Aspinall Unit to the Monument. It's our <br />belief that a contract is feasible and will resolve issues related to <br />protection of the Monument and Gunnison Gorge. <br />We also see this as a way to resolve the reserved water right claims of <br />the United States, and provide flows for endangered fish species. At the same <br />time, the execution of a contract would further protect Colorado's ability to <br />use water under its compact entitlement. Last April we held informational <br />meetings on the proposal. <br />Significant information needs to be developed prior to issuance of a <br />contract. We need to determine how much water can be release to the Monument <br />in any given year, based on runoff forecasts and other factors. We need to <br />define how the water should be released, in other words what the seasonal <br />flows will look like. We need to ensure that the contract is meeting all <br />appropriate laws, and we need to provide for protection of the environment. <br />We are looking at three concepts. First, target elevations in Blue Mesa <br />Reservoir would be reached to maintain conservation storage and recreation <br />benefits. Secondly, an amount of water varying with annual runoff would be <br />delivered to the Monument and Gunnison Gorge. Finally, water would be <br />delivered in a more natural seasonal hydrologic pattern, with higher spring <br />flows and lower winter flows. <br />9