BOARD02029

• Board Meeting Date: 1/24/2006
• Description: ISF Section - 2006 New Appropriation Recommendations in Water Divisions 1,4,6 and 7
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

r,
.<

..4

..

.

.

.

~

Moffilt COIDlty Natural Resources Depanment
221 W. Victory Way. Suite 130. Craig CO 81625
1'1100e 970.826.3400 Fax [phone]

I>,.
"',...--..
-....4..,.'

''';/-.''''''
> ,_ :..J

December 9, 2005

CCIOt?
(folly,
'fIf'rr
~O'1,>>1'
"'f

?OOS

Colorado Water Conservation Board
Stream and Lake Protection Program
Attn: Dan Merriman
1313 Shennan St. Rm 721
Denver, CO 80203

The Moffat County Commissioners have great concern over the two proposed instream flow designations
in Moffat County. Considering Colorado Water Conservation Board's (CWCB) new attempt to involve
affected interests prior to designations, we deeply appreciate the time that Jeff Baessler and Todd Doherty
dedicated to the Moffat County Land Use Board On November 7, 2005. In fact after listening to discussion
by the Moffat County Land Use Board, we appreciate that the North and South forks of Fortification Creek
have been deferred to 2007, and that the Little Snake River, Red Wash, and Willow Creek are no longer
WIder consideration for instream flow designation.

To date, we have not seen data to justity the two proposals before the board nor believe the information that
the CWCB has presented to the Moffat County Land Use Board offers any evidence for Moffat County to
support instream flow appropriations at this time.

OVERRIDING CONCERNS:

I) Currently the August 8, 2005 Candidate Streams for Instream Flow Appropriation (Division 6)
document and informal discussions with CWCB staff are the only data available for review.
Discussions with staff indicate significant changes from the August 8" Document. We understand
data will be forthcoming early January, and we request fair time to review and respond to the data
prior to CWCB consideration of these segments. We are deeply concerned about possible
adjudications that affect Moffat County, without allowing us to review the "reasoning" behind
significant changes in the water rights. Until such time we are opposed to these appropriations
and request CWCB do not adjudicate any in-stream flows in Moffat County.
2) Affected landowners and water right owners have not been notified of proposed instream flows.
Notifying affected landowners/water right owners should occur as well as allow them due time to
comment on proposals before the CWCB appropriates any instream flows.

SPECIFIC CONCERNS:

Beaver Creek between 2 Bar Creek to the Utah Border:

I) Instream flow proposals are frivolous and duplicate existing US Fish and Wildlife Service
(USFWS) and Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW) water rights. USFWS and DOW water
rights are senior and significantly larger than all other junior (agriculture) water rights on Beaver
Creek. By the nature of their acquisition, they assure all necessary flows to protect the cold water
fishery in Beaver Creek.
2) Beaver Creek is over-adjudicated during all times of the year except peak runoff, where future
storage projects would need the adjudications that the instream flow proposal would tie up.
3) Instream flow prevents the development of storage projects when they inundate greater than 50
foot of the stream. This conflicts with potential for future storage development during high flows
on Beaver Creek.