Laserfiche WebLink
<br />than the proposed development of a contract, a decision could be made to abandon this effort <br />in favor or pursuing one of these alternatives. <br /> <br />· Meet Black Canyon needs by developing the Union Park Project and passing required <br />flows from its d...cTf'.e tWO ds M~v 1-"pntpmhpr 10 ..0 ~f< n~tnh,.r I_Ann1 1m <br />, - - ~ - - ,~- - --- -.--J - --r~-...~_. ........, ........ .......... -....................... ... ... ..1'........ -....) <br />· Protect endangered fish through Federal purchase or condemnation of water rights <br />· Augment supplies to help both endangered fish, provide lower basin growth needs, and <br />protect development of Colorado's Compact entitlement, by pumping groundwater into <br />the Gunnison Basin from the San Luis Valley for sale to lower basin customers <br />· Construct the Colorado Aqueduct Return Project (CARP) to develop and use Colorado's <br />Compact entitlement and provide water for endangered fish <br /> <br />Items 7 through 10 previously discussed some major factors to consider when articulating <br />"contract" alternatives. Other comments will also help us defme alternatives. One suggestion <br />was to conduct studies to determine optimum flows for various environmental and economic <br />values, and then group values with "similar optimum flows" together (e.g. optimize flows for <br />endangered fish, riparian vegetation, campsite restoration, and sediment transport might be <br />grouped together to define one alternative), This respondent also thought selection of <br />alternatives should be "goal-driven." Others indicated that operational management targets <br />should.be used (more stability, less fluctuation at Blue Mesa, higher target level in winter). <br />Some respondents also felt that alternatives should be described by including draft contract <br />language. <br /> <br />Suggestions relating to contract alternatives included: <br /> <br />· Leave as much water in the river as possible <br />· Provide fluctuating flows which exceed the 300 cfs instream water right <br />· Meet Black Canyon needs by using habitat improvements (such as channel improvements, <br />habitat modifications, and fish stocking) <br />· Provide for more stability and less fluctuation at Blue Mesa, including higher target level <br />in winter <br />· Develop a contract which addresses Black Canyon needs as well as the need to preserve <br />historic benefits received by the Upper Gunnison Basin, including protection from <br />curtailment by downstream calls <br />· Restrict the quantity of water to be released under the Contract to an amount which <br />would provide significant protection to the Gunnison, yet allow AB Lateral Project to be <br />developed. Such an alternative might provide a 300 cfs minimum flow and set-up a <br />schedule to periodically flush the Gunnison bed (perhaps 2,000 cfs for 2 weeks every 3 <br />to 5 years). Winter releases would need to be set at 1,250 cfs, and the discretion of the <br />NPS could be used to schedule other releases, subject to other rights, <br /> <br />Formulation of concise alternatives needs to involve many potentially affected parties, and the <br />scope of alternatives needs to be determined early. Alternatives must not conflict with <br />legislation or legislative intent for managing projects or resources. Data collection and analysis <br /> <br />23 <br /> <br />;JJI/J'" r' 3' <br />" I,q, , <br />