WSP00769 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

OD1S9S Gunnison River Contract ScoDin2 - SORTED Comments 8. ARAPAHOE; p3,'2. Ukewise, a primary purpose of the Aspinall Unit is for beneficial consumptive use. The Contract could also be structured so that releases for downstream consumptive uses are made in a manner so as to benefit fisheries and recreation in the Monument. However, only that water for which there are contracts should be associated with those releases. ".",,":... (~:(t?j~~~:: 8. ARAPAHOE; pS,'2. Rather than guaranteeing that the Aspinall Unit will continue to be operated to make huge releases when there is no requirement to deliver that water to the Lower Basin States, a methodology would be adopted which determines the amount of flows actually needed within the Monument. Othcrwise, the Aspinall Unit truly is a "flow through" facility which will attempt to place calls on the Gunnison River to deliver that water through the Monument to the Lower Basin States. 8. CAMPBELL; p2,'3. As you know, there is no shortage of competing interests in the Gunnison Basin. In fact, the uncertainties surrounding the river have lead national environmental group' American Rivers to list the Gunnison River as onc of the most endangered rivers in America for the second year in a row. 8. COLO SPR; p2.#12. With specific reference to paragraph S.f. on page 6-7, how can one "plus" the acc-;;mulated and/or anticipated releases associated with the 300,000 acre foot supply if, pursuant to. paragraph S.c" that 300,000 acre feet is "not included in the volume of water to he released and delivered"? COLD SPR; p3.#13. With specific refereoce to paragraph S.f., why should one "minus" downstream senior rights when one is merely seeking instream flows through the Canyon? COLO_SPR; p3.#14. With specific reference.to paragraph S.f., how will the "hlanks" in the last sentence be determined, and how was the total figure of 736,000 acre feet calculated? ...... ". _.':. ':.:~.:.:::~~~.~:.~ I 8. CREDA; pS,'8. On page 4 of the contract, subparagraph 3.a. appears to make the Dbjectives of the Monument superior to those of the Aspinall Unit and the Colorado River Storage Project. Is that what is intended? 8. CRWCD; p2,'3. 4. This scoping process has been noticed to the public and to state/local agencies as necessary prior to initiating negotiations on the contract referenced above. The contract must be limited to serving the legitimate needs of BCNM. While it is appropriate tD consider the. requests of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) for flows to augment endangered fisb habitat on the lower Gunnison Rive during the process, it must be recognized tbat the amounts of water requested by NPS and FWS require separate and distinct justifications. 8. CWCB; pI,'S. 4) Protection of fish, wildlife and recreational resources in the Aspinall Unit (Curecanti NatioDal Recreation Area) as well as the Monument and Gunnison Gorge. 8. CWCB; pl,'8. 7) Consistency between the proposed water service contract for the Monument, resolution of the Monument reserved water right claims filed by the NPS in water court, and releases of water from the Aspinall Unit for endangered fish. 8. GREENO+; pll,'3. (Issue M. Water Supply, cont.) 2) ASDinall Unit Water SUDol v (300,000 acre-feet developed by the Bureau of Reclamation) aJ What is the status of the 60.000 acre-foot Blue Mesa SubordinatiDn and how will it affect the contract'? bJ Will tbe Bureau of Reclamation allow diversions of all or part of the 300,000 acre-foot Aspinall Unit Water Supply above the National Monument? '"". o . ~. ""0 23 .;:y