My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01134
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01134
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:58:29 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:50:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/21/1998
Description
WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - 15-Mile Reach ESA Section 7 Consultation - Status Report
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />an interim basis, water users from both east and west slopes propose use of their existing <br />facilities until the yield from those facilities is needed for consumptive use. During that <br />interim, they propose permanent replacement sources, for which they would provide or <br />secure funding to buy or build any necessary facilities. <br /> <br />The Grand Valley Water Management Improvement Project also continues to play <br />an important role. Through an investment of approximately $8.5 million, the Recovery <br />Program proposes to install a series of check structures and sophisticated controls along <br />the Grand Valley Canal that would reduce its average annual administrative spills by <br />approximately 29 KAF. However, several unresolved issues impede the progress of this <br />critical element of the RIPRAP. First, the Grand Valley Water Users Association insists <br />upon complete protection against any future cost of these measures, and full protection of <br />their existing depletions from future section 7 consultation requirements. In addition, the <br />canal improvements would presumably result in less water being called out of Green <br />Mountain Reservoir and there are significant concems (described below) about the extent <br />to which waters stored at Green Mountain Reservoir can be released and protected <br />downstream to the I5-Mile Reach past other points of diversion that would be in priority. <br />As a result of these complications, the Recovery Program has been holding several <br />million dollars for 3 years, waiting to initiate construction. <br /> <br />Green Mountain Reservoir also plays a critical role as a result of the Orchard <br />Mesa Check settlement. As a result, there are actually two potential sources of additional <br />water in Green Mountain: one would result from the Grand Valley Water Management <br />Improvement Project and the other occurs as a result of the Orchard Mesa Check <br />settlement. To the extent that additional water can be delivered under contract to the <br />power facilities at the top of the 15-Mile Reach, delivery and protection appears to be <br />relatively straightforward. However, it is not clear that the water rights for storage at <br />Green Mountain Reservoir (the Blue River Decree) include enhancement of downstream <br />fish habitat as a recognized use. As a result, we have not been willing to agree that the <br />state can protect those releases in excess of power plant capacity from diversion by other <br />water users unless the federal authorizing legislation and/or the storage decree are <br />modified. This has led many of the water users to explore the possibility of "forbearance <br />agreements," under which Recovery Program participants would agree not to divert those <br />released flows even though they may be in priority to do so. The federal agencies oppose <br />this altemative and many of the water users have questions about this approach that have <br />not been answered. <br /> <br />At the September 18 meeting ofthe 15-Mile Reach Strategy Group, we agreed <br />that the evaluation of options for protecting these stored waters must be resolved, if that <br />is possible, within the next three months. Otherwise we may have to accept that the <br />Grand Valley Water Management Improvement Project and the benefits of the Orchard <br />Mesa Check settlement for the endangered fish are not worth Recovery Program efforts. <br />This would probably represent a major setback and could have very negative <br />consequences. <br /> <br />A new action item has been added to our discussion that is frequently referred to <br />as "coord' ,:,,+ed management of Division 5 water facilities." It is envisioned that this <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.