Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.'- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />"', <br /> <br />- 54 - <br /> <br />'-- <br /> <br />should note that Colorado has no legal obligation to de- <br /> <br />liver any set amount of water from the vlliite River to <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />Utah, since Utah elected to take delivery of its compact <br /> <br />share at the Maybell gauge on the Yampa River. Nor is <br /> <br />v <br /> <br />Colorado responsible for meeting whatever water rights <br /> <br />are ultimately awarded to the Ute Indian tribe (which <br />*/ <br />will be charged against Utah's compact entitlements).- <br /> <br />We note that Utah could fulfill whatever obligations it <br /> <br />may have to the Ute tribe with Green River water. In <br /> <br />any event, the average annual flow of 225,000 acre feet <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />to Utah should more than meet any reasonably foreseeable <br />needs within the State of Utah. The DEIS offers no <br /> <br />evidence to the contrary. <br /> <br />The DEIS should recognize that even in the worst <br />year of record, the yield from Taylor Gulch Reservoir <br />would have been 35,000 acre feet. Deseret could obtain <br /> <br />,the first 20,000 acre feet of this water. <br /> <br />2. Timeliness of Water Availability <br />The issue of timeliness of the water supply at <br /> <br />the Rangely site also deserves comment. As the DEIS <br /> <br />*/ It is most unusual that the DEIS discusses a possible <br />obligation of an upstream state to an Indian tribe in a <br />downstream state. In our review of past environmental <br />impact statements regarding Colorado water projects, no <br />such inference has been made. <br /> <br />..i <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />03'18 <br />