Laserfiche WebLink
<br />") <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />7. Trout Unlimited y. Department of Aericulture/Okanoean County Y. National <br />Marine Fisheries Service. <br /> <br />Last spring, the federal district court for Colorado ruled against the Forest Service, <br />Colorado, Greeley and Water Supply & Storage Co. in this case. The case arose frorn Trout <br />Unlimited's challenge to the FS decision not to impose bypass flows on Long Draw <br />Reservoir, located at the headwaters of the Cache la Poudre River. On cross motions for <br />summary judgment, the judge ruled against TU on most of its challenges, but nevertheless <br />found that the FS decision to allow 1.2 miles of stream to be dewatered was arbitrary and <br />capricious and a violation of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA). We <br />had joined with the water users in arguing that the FS could not impose bypass flows under <br />FLPMA, because of the potential for disruption of hundreds of water diversion and storage <br />structures located on national forest lands. In conjunction with Greeley and Water Supply <br />and Storage Company, we filed a notice of appeal on August 18th. Shortly afterward, the <br />Forest Service and then Trout Unlimited also filed appeals, which were consolidated for <br />briefing. The United States decided to withdraw its appeal in early November. After we <br />filed our opening brief on November 22, the United States then moved to dismiss both our <br />appeal and TU's cross-appeal, arguing that the decision below was not a final judgment. We <br />opposed the motion, and are still awaiting a decision. <br /> <br />8. Green Mountain Reservoir/Heeney landslide case. <br /> <br />On August 7,2003, the Colorado River Water Conservation District and several other <br />west-slope entities filed a petition against the Bureau of Reclamation in U.S. District Court <br />for Colorado to enforce the provisions of the Blue River Decree. The west slope petitioners <br />are seeking changes of Bureau ofReclarnation policy concerning the interrelationships of the <br />replacement pool and power pool in Green Mountain Reservoir. The Division of Water <br />Resources has intervened in this litigation. The United States has produced an administrative <br />record over 42,000 pages in length and has filed motions to limit judicial review to that <br />record. The Division of Water Resources has opposed those motions. The parties have <br />agreed on a method to allocate any operational shortage for 2005. As a result, the Court has <br />vacated the schedule that would have required summary judgment motions by March 1st <br />Meanwhile, all parties have begun mediation using Chris Moore ofCDR & Associates. <br /> <br />Green Mountain Reservoir administration issues. The drought has raised issues about <br />how the State Engineer administers the fill of Green Mountain Reservoir. The State <br />Engineer adopted an interim policy that comprornised the positions of the east and west <br />slopes. A committee of interested parties was formed to work out an acceptable agreement <br />on administration. All of the parties last met on February 18,2005 to discuss the Bureau's <br />proposed operations and the State Engineer's interim administration policy. The parties will <br />meet again April 14th. <br /> <br />3 <br />