Testimony by Melinda Kassen

• Description: Briefing Papers H.R. 3881
• State: CO
• Basin: Arkansas
• Water Division: 2
• Date: 3/19/2002
• Author: Melinda Kassen
• Title: Testimony by Melinda Kassen
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

MRK Testimony http: / /resourcescommittee. house. gov /107cong /water /2002mar19/kassen.htm
.
on both sides of the Continental Divide. We suggest that the Project not be used to de -water the
Arkansas River between Pueblo Reservoir and Fountain Creek, and not allow any expansion or
re- operation of project facilities to harm the Colorado River Basin tributaries that contribute their flows
to the Arkansas and South Platte River Basins. While Section 12 of the bill appears to limit the
additional draw on the Colorado River, it does allow new depletions if accompanied by compensatory
storage for west slope water users. Given the realities of the west slope economy, and given the fish and
wildlife purposes of the initial project, TU urges Congress to ensure that the Bureau not only considers
compensatory storage, but also ensures protection of the remaining aquatic and recreational values of the
Fryingpan River valley.
In this complex situation, it is important for the Bureau to take the lead to helping the Arkansas River
Basin respond to the growth pressures it faces. That means fine- tuning the water management that the
Bureau's Fry-Ark Project makes possible. But, particularly given the Corps' and its partners'
investment in the Legacy Project, it is important for the Bureau to act as well to protect the fish and
wildlife benefits that are also within the purposes of the original Fry-Ark Project.
BALANCING ARKANSAS RIVER PROTECTION AND SUPPLYING WATER FOR
GROWTH
TU isn not opposed o o d to growth; we recognize that the Rocky Mountain West generally, pP � � Y g Y, and southeastern
Colorado in this instance, is sin to grow. That said, TU believes that the g �' ,
U t e onl way to
Y Y grow
responsibly is to do so while protecting ct n important environmental and recreational p g p eational resources. In a state
like Colorado, these protections are necessary to preserve the quality of life. This is especially the case
where such resources have been the centerpiece of cooperative federal/state /local restoration efforts. In
considering this bill, the subcommittee needs to determine how best to protect the federal investment,
through the Corps, in the Arkansas River Legacy Project, including sustaining flows in the reach subject
to restoration. H.R. 3881 should not start a process that will lead to the Bureau taking action that will
undermine this Corps initiative, done in concert with local and state government, as well as local citizen
groups and individuals' support.
Therefore, we believe that Congress must direct the Bureau to impose reasonable requirements in the
contracts and project features authorized by H.R. 3881 to protect both the aquatic environment within
the Corps' Legacy Project area and that of the Colorado River Basin. H.R. 3881 should not function to
create winners and losers. Rather, the bill should ensure balance in its outcome. TU believes that
amendments to the bill can accomplish a more even -handed outcome. Such amendments would require:
o Re- operation to be done in a way that protects flows in the Corps' Legacy project reach to
accomplish that project's goals. In this regard, while TU supports Pueblo's proposal to limit
re- operation and use of enlarged capacity when flows through the City of Pueblo are less than 500
cfs in the summer and 100 cfs in the winter, we also stress that the legislation direct that ultimate
minimum and target flows be set to support a healthy wild fishery based on a thorough scientific
evaluation done during the environmental review process;
o Re- operation to be done both to protect the aquatic resources as well in the basin -of -origin
tributaries out of which additional transmountain diversions may be made, and to provide appropriate
mitigation for west slope water users;
o That the water for municipal use made available as a result of reservoir re- operations (or
reservoir enlargement after the study H.R. 3881 authorizes is completed), and in particular as a result
of increased transmountain diversions, be the subject of conservation requirements within the area of
use;
o Integration of any re- operation or expansion with the needs of the affected local communities,
including the City of Pueblo and the recreation and tourism based communities on the West Slope;
and
o Authorization of funds, if necessary, to buy water rights to accomplish the above.
7 of 8 3/20/02 10:18 AM