WSP05579 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

to ij- '.' .' . ._J.. ~ source of loss to both fish and wildlife has been eliminated by the deci- sion of the Bureau of Reclamation to fore~o ~ diversion during the period from November to March each year. However, average flows during July, August, and September would be seriously reduced as shown below: July August September Average Historical Flow of Frying Pan below mouth of North Fork in second-feet 29S 109 65 Proposed residual flow of Frying Pan below mouth of North Fork in second-feet 9S 60 S2 We suggest the possibility of an operation plan which would divert more water during May and June, and less during other mO:1ths when diversions are in progress. Such a plan might operate as follows: Frying P?.n River below North Fork April ~ June ~ Aug. Sept. - l\.verage historical flows--sec .-feet 116 537 807 295 109 6S Amount proposed for diversion (FtWS)- 16 second~feet 387 607 170 9 0 ResultinG diverions (1,000 acre-feet) .9S 23.8 36.1 10.4 .55 0 Resulti:1L residual floTI (second-fect. ) 100 150 200 125 100 65 Total annual diversicn (acre-feet). . . 71,800 Vfhile we have not bcen able to study the propo"ed diversions from the Roaring Fork in sufficient detail to sugf,est a plan of operation not detrimental to fish and nildlife, the same principles would apply in that case, Le., no diversion durinG the period from Hovenber through March; large diversions during t.he period of hi~h run-off in May and June; and lesser diversions ~uring July and August, vath none, if possible, in Sep- tember and October. Incidentally, whether or not the increased diversion from the Roaring Fork River through the Independence Pass Tunnel, made possible ~J increased storage facilities in Twin Lakes Reservoir, should be considered a part of the project proposed qy the Bureau of Reclamation is beside the point insofar as the preservation of fish and wildlife resources is con- cerned. It is the policy of the Fish and Wildlife Service, in seeking: to prevent loss of and damage to wildlife resources, to evaluate water-use dev310pments, not necessarily as a plan of a Federal age~cy, but in terms of physical changes in environmental conditions. We are as yet uncertain as to the nrobable ef:~ct on the Roaring Fork of the proposed Aspen n.eservoir. Offhand, i t \'loul~ s~em )lrefer~ble to the formcr Ruedi site on Frying Pan ~iver, and if it i" possible to maintain th~ Roarin~ ?ork as a GOod fishing stream in the roach belo~ the r3scrvoir, serious loss of habitat may bc avoided. Ho,:e'.'e,., the ]Iossi- bility of the reservoir itself maintaininc good fish ]lrG~.cdion is far from certain in the li[;ht of present knO\'lledge and experi'J:1ce. 4