BOARD02312 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Flow Recommendations to Benefit Endangered Fish in the Gunnison and Colorado Rivers On January 27,2000 the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service CUSFWS) released draft flow recommendations for the Gunnison River and the Colorado River below the Gunnison River confluence. Staff reviewed the .. recommendations and provided initial comments back to the! Service on May 2, 2000. In the draft final . report, the peak flows were adjusted for the Gunnison so as not to exceed known damaging flood elevations. This report has been considered by the Upper Colorado Rec~very Program-Biology Committee and recommended for approval to the Program. However, the Program has not accepted the report and staff is working with other objectors to the report and the USFWS to resolve outstanding issues. We are using CRDSS to evaluate the potential flow related impacts on water development, but have not yet completed that analysis. Consistent with the Recovery Program objectives; the flow recorrunendations should not impair Colorado's ability to develop its compact apportionment. In this respect, the flow recommendations should also be acceptable to the CWCB, however, the USFWS hasjobjected to this condition previously. We would also hope that the USFWS flow recommendations and the National Park Service (NPS) reserved water right can be coordinated such that they are both satisfied by the same reservoir operation and release. Once flow recommendations are finalized, a NEP A process will be initiated by the US Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation) to see if the Aspinall Unit can be re-operated to satisfy the flow recommendations. Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park (Monument) Reserved Water Right In the United States v. Denver, 656 P.2d case, reserved water rights for the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Monument were decreed that included an unquantified conditional instream right on the Gunnison River, with a priority date between 1933 and 1939. The conditional right was decreed for fish culture and the preservation of recreational, scenic and aesthetic conditions within the Monument. The right was to be quantified within 5-years of the conclusion of the case, which arguably has not yet occurred. The NPS filed its proposed quantification in Case Number 4-01CW05. Presently, we are trying to address legal issues with respect to venue and also trying to agree on conditions that. would allow for a stay in the litigation while we a attempt to negotiate a settlement. CWCB staff has insisted that the quantification, Gunnison flow .. recommendations, and the EIS process and Section 7 con~u1tation on Aspinall Unit re-operations be done concurrently so that the impacts of each can be viewed as 'a package and fully evaluated. Again, we do not want quantification to adversely impact Colorado's abilit~ to develop its compact apportionment. We also want both the NPS reserved right and the USFWS flow r~commendations to be satisfied by the same reservoir operation and release. Staff as had several conversations with NPS, Reclamation and the Department of Justice on this matter since December 2000 and is aware that the Federal Agencies are trying to coordinate this effort. Negotiation and technical workgroups have been formed and are just beginning to address significant technical issues. Any settlement in this case will have to be acceptable to and approved by the CWCB. . Curecanti National Recreation Area - Resource Protection St~dy and Environment Impact Statement , The Curecanti National Recreation Area (CNRA) surro~ds and includes the Aspinall Storage Unit (formerly Curecanti Storage Unit) of the Colorado RiveriStorage Project. Section 8 of CRSP A provided for the construction, operation and maintenance of public recreational facilities on lands withdrawn or acquired for the project and the water areas created by the project iconsistent with the primary purposes of the project. It is under this general principle that CNRA has been operated since its establishment. CNRA was established by memorandum of agreement b;etween the Reclamation and the NPS following the construction of the Aspinall Storage Unit, The October il997 General Management Plan for CNRA acknowledges one of the CNRA mandates is, "to manage the lands, waters, and activities ofCNRA in such a way that it does not interfere with the purposes of the CRSP A and other Reclamation agreements affecting the operation of the Aspinall Unit.". e On May 3, 2000 the NPS published notice in the Federal Register that it was going to undertake a Resour~e 4(