Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />and future consumptive uses. This description is expected to be available for review in <br />draft within the next week of so. <br /> <br />The water users also raised questions concerning the transfer of existing water <br />rights to a new project or the use of existing water supplies under an exchange agreement. <br />The FWS appears to be agreeable that any such change in use will not change the <br />protection afforded the associated depletion impacts as "existing" depletions. <br /> <br />Grand Vallev Water Manal!ement Proiect There continue to be concerns that <br />approximately 9,000 AF "saved" through the Grand Valley Water Management <br />Improvement Project may not be protectable under any of the proposed RIPRAP <br />measures. It is unclear how the FWS will handle this concern, but it asked for additional <br />information from the Bureau of Reclamation. <br /> <br />The FWS also appears to be expecting that the Recovery Program will take <br />responsibility for the installation, operation and maintenance cost associated with any <br />screening devices needed to prevent endangered fish from entering the canal in <br />unacceptable numbers. The water users support this view and sought clarification that no <br />individual diversion structure would be held responsible for such problems. The FWS <br />appears to be comfortable with this arrangement, understanding that the entire PBO may <br />be reopened in the event that such "diversion" of fish with our water supplies exceeds the <br />1 % limitation on adults. <br /> <br />Shortly before the May 13 meeting, the Colorado River Water Conservation <br />District wrote to Greg Walcher and Ralph Morganwick indicating several concerns <br />discussed by members of its Board of Directors with respect to this PBO. While I share <br />many of their concerns, I am also sympathetic to the concern raised by other water users <br />that the investment required by many others in developing this PBO not be jeopardized. I <br />plan to work closely with Greg, the Water District, and the FWS to do everything we can <br />to resolve their concerns and keep you posted as these developments progress. <br /> <br />At the close of our May 13 meeting, the FWS agreed to wait a few more days for <br />comments from the Bureau of Reclamation and possibly the Western Area Power <br />Administration. A meeting was scheduled for July 19, (1 p.m. at the FWS offices in <br />Lakewood) to discuss the next draft and any additional information the FWS may need <br />from other recovery program participants. FWS plans to be able to provide a revised <br />draft PBO for review by mid-August. <br /> <br />L:/wctrans/ddl09(o) lSMRSec7 status OS99 <br />L:/boardmemIMay99/09(o) lSMRSec7 status OS99 <br />