Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />would be happy to address comments <br />any other questions you might have. I think it is <br />our recommendation that the Board utilize flow <br />recommendations that we've provided as the basis for <br />acquisition of appropriation of water rights. <br />Efforts to refine flow recommendations should be <br />undertaken and it's determined through the water <br />court that the recommendations to be provided are <br />inadequate to support both the acquisition and <br />appropriations. There are several reasons for this <br />recommendation. First the Service believes that our <br />flow recommendations are valid and that they are <br />consistent with the recovery program. For <br />example the services flow recommendation on the Yampa <br />River are consistent with the finding of every <br />biologist the Yampa River published <br />information on the fish. This includes <br />__ private, state, federal and even biologists from <br />the Division of Wildlife, they are saying the same <br />thing going back in the early 1970's. So this not <br />new information this is not the Fish and wildlife <br />Service coming up with new stuff <br />Second attempting to flow <br />recommendations to the Yampa River <br />significant differences in the flow. A major effort <br />to flow recommendation <br />at least five years. The results of such an <br />effort additional 5 to 10 percent of the <br />water maybe surplus fish from an biological <br />standpoint, but I think it is very unwise <br />major refinement effort to result in a wholesale <br />change so far conclusion that <br />other biologists come up on the last 20 years. <br />Third, I don't think that the recovery program can <br />afford to wait another 5 years before moving forward <br /> <br />16 <br />