Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />e <br /> <br /> <br />November 9, 2000 <br /> <br />RECEweo <br />NOV 16 2000 <br /> <br />Mr. Dan McAulliffe! Acting Director <br />Mr. Dan Merriman, Section Chief <br />Stream and Lake Protection Section <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />CoIOf8do Wal6f Consorvalion Board <br /> <br />Re: BLM recommendations for instream flow protection on San Miguel River <br /> <br />Dear Sirs: <br /> <br />1 am writing to express my support for in*ream flow recommendations <br />developed by the Bureau of Land Manage~ent and Colorado Division of <br />Wildlife for the San Miguel River between 'Fall Creek and Horsefly Creek. <br /> <br />As a property owner, fisherman, and member of the PlacervUle area e <br />community, I am concerned about the lac~ of adequate instream flow <br />protection on this stretch of river. Fishing is a significant part of the <br />summer economy as well as a favored sport among the local residents. <br />Many down valley residents rely on the dver aquifer for their drinking <br />water, and as flows are diverted the quality of well water may be <br />compromised. <br /> <br />In recent years, San Miguel County has b~en one of the fastest growing <br />counties in the nation due to Telluride's ~ki resort economy. Although the <br />San Miguel is regarded as a relatively intact river, it is a river at risk due <br />the impacts of urban growth which radi<l.te well beyond the borders of the <br />growth areas of Telluride and Mountain Village. <br /> <br />It is my understanding that the propose,d instream flows will have no <br />adverse effect on eXisting water rights sj.1ch as those held by downstream <br />users and municipalities, 1 believe that ~he recommended minimum flows <br />will help preserve the San Miguel River's relatively intact ecosystem and <br />especially benefit the riparian habitat ab.d its fishery. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />