BOARD00195

• Board Meeting Date: 3/20/2000
• Description: Water Resources and Power Authority Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

~~.

.~

"

Page 8
White River National Forest Management Plan Comments
Februarv 18,2000

management activities is proportional to scheduled harvest acres as shown in Table 3.7."
This table suggests that risk is only related to increased runoff. However, decreased runoff
due to unman aged increases in vegetation, either through insufficient harvests or fire
management, is also a risk for both the environment and humans dependent on adequate
runoff from the forests.

Aquatic Resources:
The Aquatic Resources section (Part 3 ,Section 7) contains a couple erroneous statements regarding
the endangered fishes of the Upper Colorado River.
~ The discussion on the four endangered fish species of the Upper Colorado River includes the
following bold conclusion, "(f)low decreases are the main factor leading to the decline of all
four species." While changes in flows may have contributed to the decline in some or all of
these species, no such definitive conclusion has been drawn about the relative impact of
changes in river flows to fish populations. Competition from introduced sport and bait fish
species, changes in water quality, channel morphology, and natural competitive processes
have all contributed to the decline in these species and should be recognized or in the
alternative this sentence should be removed.

~ The US Fish and Wildlife Service did not "purchase(d) water from Ruedi to be released for
the four species of endangered fish in the Colorado River." (Page 3-231) This sentence
should read: "The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service controls water in Ruedi for periodic release
to benefit the four species of endangered fish in the Colorado River and their habitat."

Wild & Scenic Rivers:
Appendix F addresses "Wild and Scenic Rivers eligibility." The River District understands that this
appendix largely deals with the process of wild, scenic, and recreational designations on a factual
basis. However, the potential impact on present and future consumptive water use by any such
designation deserves mention. Concern over use of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act as a tool which
can be employed to prevent future water development can be at least partially allayed by inclusion
of a statement that recognizes the potential negative impacts on water rights both within and
upstream of a designated area and a statement committing to consideration of such impacts as part
of the suitability evaluation process. The statement on page F - 2 that "recreational, agricultural, and
residential uses may continue" is not sufficient. Who has the discretionary authority to determine
which uses may continue? Will the management of identified eligible segments change following
suitability determination? What are the practical implications of designation for water-related uses