Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.. <br /> <br />. <br />I <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (03) 866-3441 <br />FAX: (303) 666-4474 <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Bill Owens <br />Governor <br /> <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />Greg E. Walcher <br />Executive Director, DNR <br />Peter H. Evans <br />Director, eWeB <br /> <br />TO: <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board Members <br /> <br />FROM: <br /> <br />Randy Seaholm, Chief, Interstate Streams Investigations <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />DATE: March 28, 1999 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Agenda Item 21j, March 29-30,1999 Board Meeting- <br />Colorado River Basin Issues <br />15-Mile Reach ESA Section 7 Consultation - Status Report <br /> <br />Prol!rammatic Biolol!ical ODinion <br />Introduction <br /> <br />On March 5, 1999 the US Fish and Wildlife Service released an 80-page preliminary <br />draft of the Programmatic Biological Opinion for Upper Colo~ado River from Rifle, <br />Colorado to Lake Powell (PBO). The PBO addresses the current Recovery Program <br />actions with respect to estimated existing depletions of 1.2 million acre-feet and <br />additional (new) depletions of 120,000 acre-feet. The PBO concludes that the proposed <br />action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the four Colorado River <br />endangered fish nor destroy or adversely modify the designated critical habitat of these <br />species. <br /> <br />Discussion <br /> <br />Staff has reviewed the PBO and provided a number of comments to Tom Pitts. Tom will <br />coordinate the comments and provide them to water users for further discussion at a <br />meeting of water users to be held in Glenwood Springs on April 2nd. Most of staff's 9- <br />pages of comments seek only to clarify the language in the PBO. However, there were a <br />few substantive issues that will need to be addressed. Those issues are: <br /> <br />I. The scope of the PBO needs to be better defmed and to describe how it will relate to <br />other major Biological Opinions like that done for Flaming Gorge and in-progress on <br />the Aspinall Unit. It is not completely clear why the Opinion extends all the way to <br />Lake Powell when the actions discussed are all above the Gunnison River confluence. <br />However, we do understand those actions will have impacts all the way to Lake <br />Powell. <br />2. The PBO should cover the concentrating effects of depletions on water quality. To <br />do so would be consistent with the other Recovery Program documents. <br />