BOARD01318

• Board Meeting Date: 9/13/2005
• Description: CWCB Director's Report
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

.

.

.

.

In related news, Hal Simpson, Chair of the Western States Water Council, worked with Director Kuharich
to draft and pass a similar Western States Water Council Resolution in mid July that also supported
advancement in weather modification (WSWC pos. 264). Staff at a later time will provide a report on the
upcoming North American Interstate Weather Modification Council meeting.

Commendation Letter received from USBR regarding SNODAS and Weather Modification
A commendation letter dated August 9,2005 was transmitted to the CWCB from Steve Hunter of the
U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) regarding SNODAS and weather modification activities at the
CWCB. The letter enumerates several key areas where the CWCB has collaborated with the USBR
Technical Service-Center in the areas-of"EnhancedSnowpackAssessmenhn eolorado" and "Weather
Modification Operations and Evaluation". Mr. Joe Busto of the CWCB Flood Protection Staff was
specifically pointed out as having a very positive impact related to the above mentioned programs. As an
example, the letter states that "Mr. Busto has been instrumental in changing perceptions and the political
landscape about weather modification in the West". Stafflooks forward to continued work in SNODAS
and weather modification with great optimism that water resource benefits will be received by Colorado
and other western states.

Montana Water Trust -- The Montana Water Trust, established in 2001, works with farmers, ranchers
and other landowners to restore and enhance stream flows for the benefit of Montana's wild and native
fish species. The Montana Water Trust has adopted Colorado's R2Cross instream flow incremental
methodology to assess the minimum stream flow needs for their project streams. The Water Trust's web
site acknowledges that "The Colorado Water Conservation Board developed the R2cross methodology in
1996 after recognizing a need for an instream flow methodology that expressed the following: I) cost-
effective data acquisition, 2) easy-to-Iearn and implement procedures, and 3) simple data interpretation."

Western States Instream Flow Comparison Study: In August 2004, staff contracted with Sasha
Charney to conduct a comparison of western state instream flow programs. The purpose of the study was
to document the characteristics of the individual state programs using standard criteria for all states, and
to evaluate how well the programs have accomplished their goals by comparing "in-theory" strengths
with "in-stream" accomplishments. The final report, "Decades Down the Road: An Analysis of Instream
Flow Programs in Colorado and the Western United States" found that Colorado has one of the strongest
instream flow programs of the western states. The study also found:

. "Although Colorado's statutes are among the most limiting regarding who can appropriate
instream flows, and are not the most permissive regarding types of beneficial uses for instream
flows, Colorado has still perfected more permanent water rights than any other state; in fact, more
than most other states combined."

. "A fundamental step in the protection or enforcement of an instream flow water right is knowing
what instream flow rights the state holds. ." Interestingly, many states either do not have a
tracking system for the instream flow protection measures established (such as California), or do
not have this information readily accessible (such as Texas and Washington). Other states (such
as Idaho and Colorado) have information easily accessible to the public and agency staff."

. "One area of improvement in which Colorado could continue to look to its neighbors for
assistance is the area of planning and identifying priority streams for protection. Washington and
Texas are interesting states for further study and to potentially use as models. "

The full report is available on the CWCB website at
htto:llwww.cwcb.state.co.us/isf/Programs/WestemISF.htm

5