Laserfiche WebLink
<br />In the 1997 Cooperative Agreement, the three states agreed to contribute 70,000 af in <br />water through three projects: the Pathfinder Enlargement in Wyoming (20,000 af); an <br />Environmental Account in Lake McConaughy in Nebraska (40,000 af); and the Tamarack <br />Groundwater Reregulation project in Colorado (10,000 af). The Water Action Plan <br />identifies how the Program will obtain the full 130,000-150,000 af. <br /> <br />Despite tremendous pressure to put more on the table in these negotiations, Colorado has <br />stuck with its offer of an additional 17,000 af (27,000 af total) through additional water <br />reregulation projects similar to the Tamarack Project Nebraska has offered <br />approximately 30,000 afthrough various projects (many of which are somewhat <br />speculative); and Wyoming has offered 13,600 af(which is also suspect). We have <br />continually stressed the certainty, permanence and accountability typical of Tamarack as <br />proof that Colorado is committed to the Program and unwilling to consider alternatives <br />that don't meet these criteria. <br /> <br />The environmental community came out hard against forest management being included <br />in the Water Action Plan. Citing their constituents hard feelings on the matter, they <br />vehemently opposed committing the federal government to a specific water contribution. <br />Our response was that the federal government had an equal responsibility to comply with <br />the ESA and that we all have difficulties with our constituents' acceptance of this <br />Program. <br /> <br />The potential yield offorest management, according to Boyle engineering and the <br />Environmental Impact Statement Team, is small. The states believe that further <br />evaluation needs to be completed and that we must recognize forest management in the <br />Water Action Plan. As a result, we will include language in the Water Action Plan that <br />forest management may have affected flows and that further study is needed to determine <br />the Forest Service's responsibility to make up for those impacts. The language will also <br />recognize that the Forest Service may not continue to erode baseline flows. Ralph <br />Morgenweck committed to address this issue in consultation with the Forest Service. <br />Meanwhile, the states will continue to address forest management and support further <br />study in an attempt to resolve conflicting yield estimates. <br /> <br />The completion of a draft Water Action Plan Committee that initially appears to attain the <br />water goal of the Program is a important achievement However, we still face a number <br />of significant challenges as we work out the details of the proposed Program and enter <br />into the Environmental Impact Statement process. Despite these uncertainties, we are in <br />a good position to deal with whatever happens during the next several months. <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />~. <br />