My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Upper Colorado River Stakeholder Group Conceptual Plan for a Wild and Secnic Management Alternative June 30 2009
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
6001-7000
>
Upper Colorado River Stakeholder Group Conceptual Plan for a Wild and Secnic Management Alternative June 30 2009
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/5/2012 2:38:04 PM
Creation date
10/5/2012 1:54:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Upper Colorado River Stakeholder Group Conceptual Plan for a Wild and Secnic Management Alternative June 30 2009
State
CO
Date
6/30/2008
Title
Upper Colorado River Stakeholder Group Conceptual Plan for a Wild and Secnic Management Alternative June 30 2009
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
61
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
June 30, 2008 <br />III. Permanent Flow Protection <br />A River District ISF right could offer long term stream flow protection. Timing and <br />amounts would have to be determined. <br />IV. Pros and Cons <br />Pros <br />• This concept may allow the River District to develop water rights for fish under their <br />statutory authority. <br />• A River District ISF may be another source of water to protect flows through <br />Segments 4 through 7. <br />Cons <br />• An application of this nature is most likely to be contentious in Water Court and <br />within the Stakeholder Group. <br />• A River District ISF could entail lengthy litigation that could mire down the process <br />to develop a Management Plan Alternative. <br />• CWCB believes this authority has been superseded by its own authority to <br />appropriate ISFs. <br />13A. WILD & SCENIC RIVERS DESIGNATION UNDER § 2(A)(I) <br />I. Description of Basic Concept <br />Under this approach, Congress would designate the segments under the Wild & Scenic <br />Rivers Act ( "WSRA "). Flows necessary to support the ORVs could be protected through <br />federal reserved water rights or through any other effective legal mechanism (e.g., <br />CWCB instream flow rights and operational agreements). The WSRA requires <br />protection of water flows in designated rivers. However, it does not dictate protection by <br />reserved rights. Rather, the means by which ORV flows are to be protected can be <br />specified in the adopting, federal legislation. <br />II. Potential Benefits <br />WSRA designation provides permanency. Whichever flow protection measure is <br />adopted, it would not be subject to review by BLM in subsequent land management <br />plans. WSRA designation provides certainty. Once adopted through federal legislation, <br />the flow protection plan would not be subject to challenge by third parties. WSRA <br />designation under § 2(a)(i) may provide federal funding for implementation of a <br />comprehensive management plan. WSRA designation is binding on federal agencies. <br />There is compliance with a flow protection plan that is presumed to protect ORVs in the <br />context of federal agency approval and funding of projects. <br />III. Permanent flow protection <br />WSRA can provide permanent flow protection provided the underlying protection <br />mechanism selected provides permanent flow protection. <br />am <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.