BOARD01677 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

coordinate this effort with the Colorado River Water Conservation District (which has hired consultants to do similar work). It is our understanding that the DOW is sending a letter explaining that making recommendations as you requested is a high priority for the agency, explaining why it is important to complete their research and the resources that may be needed if they are required to expedite their work. We will forward this letter on to you when I receive it. In the meantime, it is important to recognize that the discussions concerning a programmatic IS-Mile Reach Biological Opinion is not contingent upon the state's protection of habitat using instream flows. Those discussions have identified many other ways that habitat can be protected, including coordinated reservoir operations, water and land acquisitions and leases and fish ladders. However, the Recovery Program's Recovery Action Plan (RIPRAP) still requires habitat protection using instream flows. As a result, it will be imperative that we work closely with the Recovery Program's Management Committee to review the role of water rights and to ensure flows based on state law and methods will be respected. Salinity Control Ceiling Authorization Increase Hearing: The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is holding a hearing on S. 1211, that increases the spending authorization of the Colorado River Salinity Control Program by $100 million, on July 28. We endorsed the legislation at our March 1999 meeting. The Salinity Control Program is very important to Colorado because it allows us to develop our Compact apportioned water free from objections based on salinity impairments to water quality in the Lower basin. In addition, many salinity control projects are located in Western Colorado and directly benefit local irrigators. We will be sending in a statement of support for the hearing record. - Colorado River Surplus Criteria: On June 29, we wrote to the Bureau of Reclamation's Regional Director in Boulder City, Nevada urging the adoption of a short-term policy allowing more leeway in determining whether there is surplus Colorado River water that can be used by California, if California implements measures to reduce its consumption. Our letter, which you should have seen earlier, was written to in response to a May 18 Federal Register notice and request for comments regarding the development of "surplus criteria" for the management of the Colorado River. Our letter followed "proposed principles for negotiation of interim surplus criteria for Colorado River reservoir operations" that were developed by Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Wyoming and delivered to California on Oct. 20, 1998. On Dec. 4,- 1998, these principles were translated into a joint paper from the five states and the slate of Utah concerning interim reservoir operating criteria for Lake Mead. Our letter also supported Reclamation's efforts to encourage California to reduce its annual consumptive uses to the 4.4 million acre-feet allowed.under the Colorado River Compact and offered to help review California's progress annually. The short-term policy allowing California to continue using more than its share must be closely tied to measurable progress by California in reducing its future dependence on water supplies that are allocated to other states. Nobody wants people in California to suffer severe shortages, but we clearly expect California to respect our growing needs and our agreed-upon allocation. We expressed concerned that, if Reclamation develops operating plans that provide more water for California, it could also reduce the amount of water stored in Lake Powell, which is the last reservoir on the border of the upper and lower basins. One of the principal functions of Lake 20