WSP04202 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, . e e 000183 NATIONAL FOREST RESERVED WATER RIGHT CLAIMS COLORADO WATER DIVISION 2 TECHNICAL WORKGROUP GROUP I STREAM SUMMARY March 10, 1997 prepared by D. Randolph Seaholm Overview The technical workgroup, composed of representatives from affected water users in each watershed, the State, Southeastern Colorado Water Conservation District and U.S. Forest Service, was given the task of providing flow recommendations on Group 1 streams to the principal negotiators in the Colorado Water Division 2 National Forest Reserved Water Rights Claim Case. Originally, this task consisted oflooking at 44 streams. Of these 44 streams, the claims on 3 were dropped altogether by the USFS. Additionally, the recommendation is to relocate the QP on 7 streams, which may result in two or three QP's higher up in the basin instead of one QP low down on the stream that would command the entire watershed. As a result, there are now 45 QP's in the Group 1 classification. Ofthese 45 QP's the CWCB holds instream flow decrees or has proposed instream flow recommendations on 25 streams and there are 20 streams on which information is needed. The CWCB, CDOW and USFS implemented a workplan for collecting data and developing flow recommendations on the 20 streams at the proposed QP. The data collection efforts were split between the CWCB and CDOW staff and the USFS staff. To date, the CWCB and CDOW staff, with assistance from two USFS individuals, has completed their data collection and done the data reduction necessary to develop flow recommendations. The USFS has completed only a portion of the data collection they agreed to do. That data has been provided to the CDOW and they are currently doing the data reduction in cooperation with Dave Park of the USFS. It will likely be May, 1997 before the USFS can finish their data collection on the remaining streams. Jim Maxwell and Lee Chavez with the USFS have indicated that they have the people and a plan for completing the necessary data collection by May, 1997. To date, the workgroup has met 4 times and will need to meet at least once more to review the proposed flow recommendations being developed and discuss the high flow recommendations further. In addition to the CWCB instream flows on the 45 Group I streams, the USFS is also requesting the protection of higher flows between May 1 and July 15 of each year on 14 streams. They would like that protection to provide for at least 70 % of the bankfull discharge and as much as 120 % of the bankfull discharge. The USFS agreed to provide an explanation oftheir methodology and need for these flows but to date, the technical workgroup has not received anything in writing. It has been explained that the primary need for these higher flows was to help move sediment, much of which would come from 1