Letter from Colorado River District

Home Browse Search

Mr. Jeremy Castcrson Bureau of Land Management Little Snake Field Office May 16, 2007 Page 3 B. The River District owns conditional water rights that would inundate all three proposed Yampa River Segments,which would frustrate the future protection of the Outstandingly Remarkable Values("ORVs"). The River District owns multiple conditional water rights in the basin. See Exhibit A. As referenced by the Juniper District, the River District owns conditional water rights for the Juniper Reservoir and Cross Mountain Reservoir. Both of these projects would inundate the three proposed Yampa River segments. See Exhibits B&C. The State of Colorado is struggling to meet its future water demands as evidenced by the Statewide Water Supply Investigation ("SWSI") and the roundtable process established by the Colorado Water for the 21"Century Act. C.R.S. §37-75-101 et seq. ("HB 1177"). Foreclosing options to meet Colorado's future water needs is not in the best interest of Colorado nor does it meet the Federal Land Policy and Management Act(" FLPMA") requirement that BLM's land use plans and public land management be consistent with state and local government plans, programs, and policies to the greatest extent possible. 43 U.S.C. § 1712(c)(9). In addition, if the reservoirs were constructed to meet future water demands pursuant to existing water rights and the on-going planning processes mentioned above, the reservoirs would inundate the proposed Yampa River segments,thereby frustrating the BLM's goal of protecting the ORVs in those proposed segments. Consequently,the River District does not believe these segments • are suitable because the proposed reservoirs and protection of the ORVs are mutually exclusive. C. Proposed segments do not meet BLM's own Suitability Criteria. The River District does not believe that the proposed segments are suitable for designation because they fail to meet five of the criteria in BLM's 8351 Manual. The BLM does not have jurisdictional control over all the lands,which will make it difficult to manage as Wild and Scenic. BLM 8351.33 (A)(2). The reasonably foreseeable potential use of the land and related waters includes two reservoirs(Juniper and Cross Mountain). BLM 8351.33 (A)(3). These uses would be foreclosed if the Yampa River segments were designated as Wild and Scenic because the uses are mutually exclusive to the goal ofprotecting the ORVs. There is significant opposition to designation of any segments as Wild and Scenic in the Yampa River basin. BLM 8351.33 (A)(4). Finally, the BLM's Manual considers whether there are other mechanisms available to protect the segment. The SWSi and HB 1177 processes described above will work to address non-consumptive water needs as well as consumptive needs. C.R.S. § 37- 75-104(2)(c). The goal of the HB 1177 process is to find mutually beneficial solutions to both its consumptive and non-consumptive needs. Designation of segments in the Yampa River would preempt that process,contrary to BLM's own guidance and FLPMA. BLM 8351 and 43 U.S.C. § 1712(c)(9).