BOARD02520

• Board Meeting Date: 5/20/2000
• Description: ISF Section - New Appropriations Work Plan
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

;J-l

MEMORANDUM

TO:

Colorado Water Conservation Board members
Dan Merriman
David Nickum and Kelly Custer, Trout Unlimited Western Water Project
March 20,2000
New Appropriations Work Plan, Agenda Item 21, March 21, 2000

FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:

We have reviewed the staff briefing memo describing the new appropriations work plan for
the instream flow program, and have the following questions and comments:

.

With regard to the numeric ratings of the priority criteria: while the criteria seem to address
the comments presented at the recent workshop, we have some questions as follows:
some of the criteria are overlapping, for example, threatened and endangered species,
native species, and species of special concern. How are these criteria applied?
another example of overlap is state parks, public lands with high recreation value, and
areas where public funds have been invested to provide access - how are these applied?
why were gold medal/wild trout waters assigned a lower value (3) than state parks (5),
when both categories are essentially special designations by state agencies?
streams with high development potential receive one point, which may be appropriate, but
the ratings do not exclude streams with little or no development pressure, The result is that
staff time may be spent on streams for which a delay in appropriation would have no effect.
One suggestion is to add a negative rating for streams which do not face development
pressure,
the ratings do not consider streams which are already far along in the work plan, such as
Phase II streams on which much data collection has already taken place. It is our
understanding that there are streams on which a small additional amount of work would
enable appropriations to be made. One example of particular interest to TU is the Fall
River near Rocky Mountain National Park. In order to prevent the expended time and
effort from going to waste, provision for those streams should be added to the ratings.
while we are pleased to see the "High Community Interest" criterion near the top of the
list, we would like to know how this will be applied. Using the Fall River as an example
again, there is a high community interest in preserving flows following abandonment of a
hydropower right which will make water available for appropriation. The interest is
evidenced by public participation in meetings on the issue and coverage in the press.

.

With regard to the list of stream segments included in the memo, we have the following
questions: