Letter to Jennifer Gimbel October 21 2009

Home Browse Search

Ms. Jennifer Gimbel, Director Colorado Water Conservation Board 1313 Sheridan Street_, Seventh Floor Denver, CO 80210 Dear Ms. Gimbel: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Colorado State Office (COSO) has determined it can accommodate the Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Stakeholder Group request for an extension to November 30, 2009. However, the COSO will not be able to accommodate any changes to the stakeholder alternative after that date due to analysis and publishing time constraints. The BLM's planning contractor will have completed the initial impact analysis of all the other sections of the land use plan by October 31, 2009, accordingly, the BLM has committed to sharing the draft plan with cooperating agencies in December 2009. While the BLM is encouraged by the stakeholder group's progress to date, it cannot justify further delay of an entire land use plat, to accommodate additional stakeholder deliberations. The Wild and Scenic lavers analysis is only one portion of a broad land use plan affecting an extensive range and number of stakeholders on other resource management issues. These stakeholders are awaiting BLM resource management decisions so they can proceed N ith their plans that will have significant economic impacts on local economies. Because of the time needed to develop a durable river management plan, and the BI_,M's need to fulfill planning obligations; we have several suggestions to facilitate cooperation between BLM and the stakeholder group. 0 If the stakeholder group is unable to deliver a final plan to the BLM by November 30, 2009, the BLM would appreciate receiving an indication ofwhether a Trial consensus on key conceptual issues for a river inanagement plan is possible, or has been achieved but there is insufficient time to "trite a detailed agreement. If a consensus has been reached, the BLM would appreciate receiving an indication whether the plan would specifically address the stream segments in Glenwood Canyon. Currently, the conceptual plan and implementation outline contain very little detail concerning Outstanding Remarkable Value (ORV) status, ORV flow needs, and the baseline hydrology for this stream reach. i U IOC lG e C c "t� en Of the Inte1OI (El", BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT �. Colorado State Office T:s.K Rc„3 ��a °'� 2850 Youngfieid Street Lakewood, Colorado 8021.5 -7093 www.blm.bov /co In Reply Refer to: 6400 (CO -932) OCT 21 2009 Ms. Jennifer Gimbel, Director Colorado Water Conservation Board 1313 Sheridan Street_, Seventh Floor Denver, CO 80210 Dear Ms. Gimbel: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Colorado State Office (COSO) has determined it can accommodate the Upper Colorado River Wild and Scenic Stakeholder Group request for an extension to November 30, 2009. However, the COSO will not be able to accommodate any changes to the stakeholder alternative after that date due to analysis and publishing time constraints. The BLM's planning contractor will have completed the initial impact analysis of all the other sections of the land use plan by October 31, 2009, accordingly, the BLM has committed to sharing the draft plan with cooperating agencies in December 2009. While the BLM is encouraged by the stakeholder group's progress to date, it cannot justify further delay of an entire land use plat, to accommodate additional stakeholder deliberations. The Wild and Scenic lavers analysis is only one portion of a broad land use plan affecting an extensive range and number of stakeholders on other resource management issues. These stakeholders are awaiting BLM resource management decisions so they can proceed N ith their plans that will have significant economic impacts on local economies. Because of the time needed to develop a durable river management plan, and the BI_,M's need to fulfill planning obligations; we have several suggestions to facilitate cooperation between BLM and the stakeholder group. 0 If the stakeholder group is unable to deliver a final plan to the BLM by November 30, 2009, the BLM would appreciate receiving an indication ofwhether a Trial consensus on key conceptual issues for a river inanagement plan is possible, or has been achieved but there is insufficient time to "trite a detailed agreement. If a consensus has been reached, the BLM would appreciate receiving an indication whether the plan would specifically address the stream segments in Glenwood Canyon. Currently, the conceptual plan and implementation outline contain very little detail concerning Outstanding Remarkable Value (ORV) status, ORV flow needs, and the baseline hydrology for this stream reach.