Laserfiche WebLink
needs of the endangered fish into Colorado's existing system of water rights. In order to achieve <br />this, two major areas of uncertainty needed to be addressed, (1) specific flow needs of the fish <br />and (2) the likely location and magnitude of the development of Colorado's unused Colorado <br />River Compact apportionment. <br />The CWCB convened an ad hoc Endangered Fish Flow and Colorado River Compact Water <br />Development Workgroup ( "Workgroup ") composed of 17 individuals representing various <br />geographical regions and water related interests associated with Colorado River water supplies <br />(e.g. irrigation, municipal and industrial, water conservancy districts, environmental) to assist in <br />the second of those tasks and in estimating the future uses of Colorado's unused compact <br />apportionment in the various subbasins of the Colorado River Basin and to assure that the people <br />of Colorado are not deprived of the beneficial use of those waters available by law and interstate <br />compact. <br />The Workgroup accepted the following premises after considerable review and discussion of the <br />documents related to the "Law of the Colorado River ": <br />• Average Colorado River basin hydrology within the state is about 10.8 MAF. <br />• Colorado's compact apportionment ranges between approximately 3.079 MAF (most likely) <br />and 3.855 MAY (best case). <br />• Colorado's current maximum adjusted consumptive use of water is approximately 2.6 MAF. <br />• Colorado's remaining unused apportionment likely is around 450,000 AF but could be as <br />much as 1.2 MAF (best case). <br />The Workgroup's report offers a recommended range of development allowances for distributing <br />the remaining apportionment among the major tributary basins of the Colorado River within <br />Colorado as well as a number of useful observations. Copies of the report are available upon <br />request. <br />Endangered Fish Recovery Program - Enhanced Regulatory Certainty - CWCB <br />participation remains strong in both the Upper Basin Recovery Program (started in 1988) and the <br />San Juan River Recovery Program (the "SJRIP," started in 1993). Both programs are intended to <br />coordinate state support, water interest support, environmental interest support and federal agency <br />support for the recovery of endangered fish species that are native to the Colorado River so that <br />development of the full allocation of water supplies within the Upper Basin states can continue. <br />The CWCB continues to support efforts by these two programs to provide certainty for existing <br />and future water supplies in coordination with the Colorado Water Congress and other program <br />participants. <br />At the present time, we are looking to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) for evidence that our <br />investments in the Recovery Programs will be rewarded with sufficient certainty for Colorado <br />water supplies in the form of a "programmatic Section 7 consultation," for water development <br />affecting the 15 -Mile Reach (between Palisade and Grand Junction) which we hope will indicate <br />that all existing supplies are already protected and that at least another 100,000 AF of <br />consumptive use can be permitted if Colorado helps assure the implementation of the Recovery <br />Program's "recovery action plan." However, we have indicated clearly to the FWS that their <br />flow recommendations exceed the available flows in the river and that it is unrealistic to expect to <br />achieve their recommendations. <br />If we see sufficient evidence of certainty for these current and future uses, we will be in a position <br />to initiate settlement discussions with the Recovery Program participants and other parties to the <br />CWCB "recovery flow" water rights applications pending in the water court (these water right <br />applications seek to protect all the unappropriated waters in excess of a "carve out" for future <br />development under a modifiable water right bearing a 1995 priority date.). The CWCB left many <br />details relative to these cases to be determined through the course of these discussions to increase <br />the opportunity for settlement and to avoid imposing hardships. <br />C; \msoffice \winword \document \basi nissues <br />December 30, 1997 <br />Page 5 of 19 <br />