BOARD02377

• Board Meeting Date: 7/13/1998
• Description: WSP Section - Colorado River Basin Issues - 15-Mile Reach Recovery Water Rights - Cases No. 5-95CW296 and 5-95CW297
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

7/2/98

.

HIGH
COUNTRY
CITIZENS'
ALLIANCE

Randy Seaholm ,
Colorado Water Conservation Board
1313 Sherman St., Rm. 721
Denver, CO 80203

RECEIVED
JUL 02 1998

Colar.~'~'" Water
Ccnserv,:;,i.;n Board

Dear Randy,

There are a number of reasons to continue to pursue the Board's instream flow filings in
cases 5-95CW296, 297 and 6-95CWI55, 156. High Country Citizens' Alliance and the
Sierra Club ask the Board to follow through on its commitment to participate in the
Recovery Program by appropriating flows for the endangered fish, even though the Fish
and Wildlife Service may no longer be relying on the Board's filings.

.

The first reason is the need to protect our state water rights system. If the Recovery
Program disintegrates because of the difficulties of resolving the objections filed against
the Board's application, the current and future water users will be more threatened by the
uncertainty of future ESA consultations. ' ,

Even though several federal agencies have shown their lack of confidence in having to
rely on state's Instream Flow Program, the citizens of Colorado must rely on the Program
as the only place in Colorado water law that provides for environmental protection.

Another reason to continue to pursue the filings is to be assured that the state will be able
to meet its Compact delivery obligations. The Board should file for sufficient instream
flows for the I5-mile reach and in the Yampa so as not to get into a situation similar to
other basins where other states are suing Colorado over Compact infractions. It is only
logical and prudent. If the Board wants to reconfigure its filings to better reflect this need,
we would not object.

.

Peter Evans' quote, "We cannot, will not, put the needs of the fish ahead of the needs of
people" in Monday's Denver Post is irresponsible and a distortion ofthe situation. Peter
is confusing needs with wants. The Front Range water users want additional surface
water supplies from the Colorado River, but don't need it. They want Colorado River
water because they perceive it is cheaper than developing the 300 maf of water in the
Denver Basin aquifers,

P.O. BOX 1066, CRESTED BUTTE, COLORADO 81224,970/349-7104 ' @