BOARD02509

• Board Meeting Date: 7/9/1992
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos. Partial.
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

.

.

.

.

JU" "'" -,,'" 1::l;o:44PM PITKIN COUNTY ADMIN

P.3

experimental in that the Fish and Wildlife Service has no empirical
evidence that the releases are improving endangered species
reproductive rates or populations. We feel that it is important
to document the impact of releases on endangered fish as a means
of determining the real tradeoffs inherent in this program.

The Ruedi Water and Power Authority has consistently promoted
threshold lake levels of 95,000 acre-feet through September 1 and
85,000 acre-feet through October 1, plus maximum streamflow levels
of 250 cfs in the Fryingpan, as appropriate targets for Bureau
management practices for RuedL Any releases for endangered
species that allows for these thresholds to be maintained in a
reasonable manner will be supported by RWAPA. Our studies of Ruedi
recreational patterns and values indicate to us that recreational
use of Ruedi is strong during the late summer and early fall months
and that full reservoir levels during August, September and October
have a direct and beneficial impact on the local economy. Moreover,
it would only take a minor adjustment in the Bureau's plans to
achieve these thresholds. For instance, if we assume a full
reservoir (101,000 af) on August 1, a 250 cfs cap on outflow, and
an inflow of approximately 40 cfs, a delay of only two weeks in the
start of supplemental releases would result in lake levels of
94,753 af on September 1. We note that this was the release
pattern in 1991 due partially to high natural streamflows in August
of 1991 and partially due to delays in the ratification of the
Bureau's agreement with the CWCB. We believe that the MOA should
acknowledge these thresholds as targets for the Bureau's proqram
and either delay the supplemental releases accordingly or at least
restrict them so that releases are made prior to mid-August only
to raise streamflows in the 15-mile reach to the minimum 700 cfs
level.

We expect for any agreement between the Bureau, the FiSh and
Wildlife Service and the Colorado Water Conservation Board to be
for a limited period of time, specifically, one year or less.
Because the Bureau is preparing to move ahead with Round II sales,
and because those sales may significantly alter Ruedi management
assumptions, we feel that any agreement must make clear the
temporary nature of additional releases for endangered species.
As we have noted on other occasions, one of the Authority's
concerns is that additional releases for endangered species will
become so institutionalized over time that, in the long run, they
will impact Ruedi in add! tion to rather than instead of sales
release impacts. . One of the few ways to guarantee against such an
eventuality is to be explicit about the annual nature of these
supplemental releases.

2