BOARD00851

• Board Meeting Date: 11/23/1998
• Description: ISF Section - Instream Flow Subcommittee Draft Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Appendix A. Instream Flow Subcommittee Issues, Current Aetivities, Public Input, Limitations, and StllffRecommendations

New Appropriation Issues (20.3%)

i,

I I

Issue Type Current Activity Publie Input Limitatiaos Staff Recommendation and
Basis
I. Adequate lime period and New procedures approved and More I better information Additional time Proceed under new procedure
infonnation availability prior to implemented 90 day pcriod 100 short Internet access not universal Most issues addressed in new
new filing. Notices posted on Internet Use Internet to post notices and BudgetIResources procedures
infonnation on public meetings Notices posted on Internet
2. Water Availability: USGS Water Data How accurate is water Lack of USGS dala in some Support current or expanded
- Adequacy of studies/data Synthetic Hydroglllphs availability analysis? areas. USGS I State monitoring of
Review of infonnation provided Accuracy of hydrologic models streamflows.
(2.9%) by other parties Verification of synthetic
methods.
Promote research in this area
3. Water Availability: Biological recommendation is BioJogical recommendations RlCROSS is a standard selling Use incremental methods where
- Relationship to flow reviewed in light of water should be documented when technique. appropriate.
recommendations availability issues. water availability issues Use gaps between recommended
override. documentation should fiows and available water as
(4.3%) be provided. factor in establishing priorities
for acquisilions.
4. New appropriations should Use RlCROSS or IFIM 10 Establish water dependent Resources Continue to bring flow
consider values other than protect fisheries environmental priorities and Research priorities are currently recommendations to CWCB
fisheries. goals for new appropriations focused elsewhere. based on best available data and
methodologies.
(7.3%) Identify new methods for Methods currently do not exist
detennining flow needs for non- for many of these values, CWCIl will consider on a case-
coldwater fisheries, water particularly water quality. by-case basis
quality, recreation, recreation. aesthetics
rarelthreatenedlendangered/decli
ning species, wilderness,
aesthetics, riparian values. etc.
5. Allow others to file or hold CWCB generally opposes any Allow others to hold (SF rights Statute precludes any party other Expand Acquisition Program 10
inscream llow water rights jnstream flow water rights filed than the CWCfl to obtain a meet this need
by others based on "exclusive decree for ISF uses.
authority" language in statute.
6. Reconsider "reasonable Use RlCROSS or IFIM 10 Look at entire habitat, not just CWCIl Policy Instruct staff to assemble a
protection" criteria protect fisheries one or two species. technical workgroup of experts
Water Availability from other agencies and the
(5.8%) Reasonable protection may not public lasked with developing an
always equal minimum "all encompassing" biologic
protection flow recommendation on a
i prototype stream system for the
eWell's consideration.

.

.

8

.

,.-