My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01355
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01355
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:00:53 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:53:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/19/2003
Description
WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - Coordinated Facilities Operations Study
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.
/
12
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 />Agenda Item 27 - Coordinated Facilities <br />May 19.20, 2003 Board Meeting <br />Page 12 of 12 <br /> <br />Since Green Mountain, Williams Fork Reservoir and Lake <!rranby water rights are not decreed for <br />this type of use, a new junior refill water right would be required. <br /> <br />Multi-Purpose Reservoir to Also Meet the 10,825 acre-foot Base Flows <br /> <br />While the voluntary Coordinated Reservoir Augmentation i1rogram with a backup Insurance Pool of <br />water could be used to meet the 20,000 acre-foot goal in the near term, the frequency and magnitude <br />that peak flows and low flows can be augmented may not b~ adequate for the fish. Since the water <br />users are required to construct new storage for supplying 10,825 acre-feet committed to the program, <br />it makes sense that the program participants should conduct a feasibility study on multi-purpose <br />reservoir options to provide both the 20,000 acre-foot spring peak flow augmentation and the 10,825 <br />acre-feet of base flow augmentation. While the new storage to provide only the 20,000 acre-feet of <br />peak flow augmentation was found to be expensive in CFOPS, it is probable that a multi-purpose <br />storage proj ect would be much more cost.effective. If a West Slope water supply function and a <br />recreation function are added to this multi-purpose project,ithe cost might be even more attractive. <br />Most importantly, this alternative would provide more certlrlnty for the fish than could be provided <br />by the voluntary CROPS, CoemiiEated R-eservoir Ofleratioli. 'Program, even with the i~surance pool. <br />The USFWS would determine how much peak flow augmentation in the spring is desired, while also <br />providing the base flow augmentation every fall. The Environmental Pools in Ruedi Reservoir and <br />Wolford Mountain Reservoir would no longer be needed for Insurance Pool purposes and could be <br />fully dedicated to the Environmental purposes. For all the stated reasons, it is important to study this <br />option before the water users have to pursue a single-purpose reservoir for supplying the 10,825 <br />acre-feet. ' <br /> <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Fu)ance . Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water Supply Protection' Conservation Planning <br /> <br />, <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.