WSP00964 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

." 2673 " Dinosaur N. Mo~ument: The Evolution of a Federal Reserved.r Right A major obstacle to be overcome in the intramural nego~ tiations between NPS and fWS was the question of who would pay. Congress, in its appropriation bill for fiscal Year 1980, eliminated from NPS's Water Resources Program budget any support of federal reserved water rights studies. Not until July 22, 1980, did the NPS formally request that the FWS undertake and fund an endangered species study on the Yam- pa within Dinosaur. Through the intercedence of the Assistant Secretary of Interior for Fish and Wildlife and Parks, the FWS was directed to comply with this request and to fund the re- search. However, in a briefmg statement prepared for internal use, NPS acknowledged that the ". . . protection and survival of the fish species constitutes [only] one element in the [National Parkl Service claim for Yampa River flow. River flow is required to maintain the total water dependent eco- system, including wildlife, and the scenic and aesthetic inte- grity of the area" ("Water Rights Alert" dated July 3, 1980). What was not being pursued was any quantification to substan~ tiate NPS claims for riparian protection, channel morphology, and recreational rafting. In its appropriation requests for Fiscal Years 1981 and 1982, NPS sought restoration of funds for quaJllification studies for reserved rights. And twice again, Congress deleted water rights funds from the budget, apparently extracting flOrn the NPS a promise not to use any of its water resources budgets for water rights purposes (R. H. Briceland. National Park Service, personal communication, 1981). The NPS was thus placed in the awkward position of being under court order to quantify its water rights (Dinosaur was one of many claims under adjudication Nationwide) while being prohibited from spending any Water Resources Program money to do so. While NPS was trying to get $100,000 to $300,000 restored for water rights work, the U.S. fish & Wildlife Service, the U.S. Forest Service and the Bureau of Land Management were together spending $4.2 million annually for filing and quanti- fying their own claims. Throughout this time, the NPS de- cided not to go back to Congress to explain the circumstances and request additional funds or to have the prohibition vacated. Because of this apparent ban, NPS headquarters rejected repeated requests for its Denver Regional Office for fuuding and for technical assistance, for fear of losing its remaining. Water Resources Program budget. The only NPS facility with available hydrological aod biological research expertise, located in Ft. Collins only a few hours drive from Dinosaur, was actually a newly established part of the headquarters office ad- ministering the Water Resources Program budget. Thus, during the critical start-up of the quantification effort, NPS would not involve its most qualified scientists. Growing antipathy between the two NPS offices hindered technical communi. cation in the field. _--'1. ROUND TWO - SCIENCE By late summer, 1981, the FWS was starting to work on the question of flows needed to sustain the endangered fish spawn- ing habitats in the Yampa. At this time, the NPS recognized that the physical habitat model used by FWS would provide only limited aspects (fish spawning habitats) of the fuller quantification needed to satisfy the court. One fundamental problem with the IFIM model as it then existed was that it assumed a stable channel morphology. Operation of the Juniper-Cross Mountain Dams would clearly affect the amount of sedimentary deposition and erosion in the Yampa although, at that time, no one was sure to what degree. The mean an- nual flow upstream from Dinosaur is on the order of 2,000 cfs. "The Juniper and Cross-Mountain Dams together could divert a mean annual average of approximately 1,690 cfs, assuming a return flow of 67 percent (Adams, er al, 1983). Adams, er al {I 983), further calcul~te that the maximum monthly shortage in the Yampa near the upstream boundary could be as high as 747 cfs (depending upon the model parameters)_ Earlier, the FWS had recommended a channel morphology study as a part of their (FIM analysis, recognizing that sedimentation and/or erosion of the sandbars within Dinosaur would affect the critical spawning areas for the fish, as well as nullifying the underlying assumption of channel stability (Cooperative lnstream Flow Service Group, 1980; M. Prewitt, Fish & Wild- life Service, personal communication, 1981). In August 1981, the NPS called in the U.S. Geological Sur. vey to propose a sedimentation study of the Yampa, in con. junction with the fWS spawning-habitat work. The initial goals for the USGS research were: (1) to quantify the amount of river flow necessary to maintain a stable river bed (premised on the assumption that the river channel itself was a. natural resource to be protected under the NPS organic act); and (2) to provide the channel morphology data to be used in the FWS IFlM anlaysis (Interagency conference at NPS Regional Office, Denver, August 21,1981, attended by the author). Un- fortunately, inadequate funding caused the USGS. to severely restrict the scope of their research. Instead of quantifying the results of altered stream flow on the channel within Dinosaur, the USGS study would simply calculate the net sediment flux through the Monument without establishing any field stations within its boundaries (Elliott, et aI., 1984). Not until November, following intense. pressure on NPS from Justice and Interior Department lawyers and careful maneuvering on the part of senior regional and headquarters managers, did NPS headquarters agree to assign their Ft. Col- lins water research staff to the problem of sedimeotation and erosion of the critical spawning sandbars within the Monu- ment. Still wary of possible Congressional reaction to allo- cating funds directly to water rights activities, the NPS studies on the Yampa never were linked to water rights but were 147 WATER RESOURCES BULLETIN -----==-....