Upper Colorado River Stakeholder Group Conceptual Plan for a Wild and Secnic Management Alternative June 30 2009

Home Browse Search

June 30, 2008 Cons • An ISF would be a junior water right and CWCB may not be able to appropriate flows in the amounts needed to adequately protect the ORVs if those flows were determined to be more than the minimum required to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degrees. 4B INSTREAM FLOWS BEYOND BASEFLOW (FOR LARGE SEASONAL OR FLUSHING FLOWS) I. Concept An ISF may be able to provide environmental "flushing flows ". This could be done under an acquisition agreement using CWCB's "improve" authority where water would be provided in larger amounts in certain years. Another way to achieve large seasonal flows would be through the acquisition of water by the CWCB via a donation, purchase of a lease that the CWCB could use to improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. This option could be less controversial than a new ISF appropriation, but would depend upon the availability for water for acquisition. II. Benefit to stream segments: A flushing flow ISF would provide spawning cues if timed correctly, and would improve trout habitat overall. III. Permanent Flow Protection A flushing flow ISF can provide the same degree of permanency as any other ISF water right. If done under an acquisition agreement, it would depend upon the terms and ability to renew the agreement. IV. Pros and Cons Pro • An ISF for flushing flows can provide major habitat improvements. Con • An ISF for flushing flows may be politically controversial. 4C. ACQUISITION OF SENIOR DECREED WATER RIGHTS FOR ISF USE I. Concept: CWCB can acquire water, water rights or interests in water to preserve or improve the natural environment to a reasonable degree. CWCB can acquire absolute direct flow or storage rights, and can acquire water rights on a permanent or temporary basis. To do so, CWCB must apply to water court to obtain a decree to use an acquired water right for ISF purposes. IC