Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />DELANEY & BALCOMB, P.C. <br />ATTORNEYS AT LAW <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />P. O. DRAWER 790 <br />818 COLORADO AVENUE <br />GLENWOOD SPRDlOS, COLORADO 81602 <br /> <br />Oft' COUNStL: <br /> <br />~HN A. TMUL.SON <br /> <br />EDW"'l'ltl MULMALL. J". <br />ScOTT 8AL.CO.... <br />LA~E...CI[ R. OfllEEN <br />TI"'o~Y A. THUL.$ON <br />Lel'll~. M. S.TT~A"EL.D <br /> <br />RoBElin' OEL,ANE'l' <br />KI[HHE'Tl1 BALCO.... <br /> <br />TELEPHO~: 9'70.94:5.6:546 <br />FACSIMILE: 970.94:5.8902 <br /> <br />EDwARO .8. OLSZEWSKI <br />DAVID SANoo'o'AL <br />OENDY M. HEISEl.. <br /> <br />VIA FACSIMILE. (303) 866-3558 <br />AND U.S. MAn. <br /> <br />RECEIVED <br />,." '1 c; 1998 <br /> <br />J::. <br />~<> <br /> <br />May 8, 1998 <br /> <br />Alido . <br />:.~,MltllVUon... __J <br /> <br />Wendy Weiss <br />Attorney General's Office <br />State Services Building <br />I S2S Sherman Street, Sib Floor <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />RE: Case Nos. 9SCW296 and 9SCW297, Division S <br /> <br />Dear Wendy: <br /> <br />. We are writing to express our clients' position regarding the pending instrearn flow <br />filings for the IS-Mile Reach in Case Nos. 9SCW296 and 9SCW297, particularly in light of the <br />discussions that occurred at the May 4 meeting with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service. <br />The Service unequivocally withdrew its suppon for both filings. . <br /> <br />As part of the negotiations in the Recovery Program "process," many of the water users <br />had considered agreeing to entry of a decree fOr the base flow right as part of a more <br />comprehensive settlement; However, we are no longer willing to support a base flow filing, as <br />the 9SCW297 case is currently strucrured. <br /> <br />We need not express to you the tremendous opposition these filings have generated, and <br />the Colorado Water Conservation Board (in 0\1r view) has been damaged to some degree in <br />prolOoting the filing despite the opposition. The damage was perhaps exacerbated by the fact <br />that the CWCB itself could not justify the need for the filings; in fact, some Board members went <br />so far as to state publicly that the filings were intended to be meaningless. We submit that the <br />CWCB could make substantial progress in re)lairing its relationship with the water users by <br />withdrawing both filings now. <br /> <br />We are hopeful that with the Service's withdrawal of support for the filings and the <br />renewed focus upon non-flow alternatives to recover the fish, recovery may actually occur. Our <br /> <br />. <br />