WSP07175 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The NPCA asked how the Union Park Project, or similar projects, would affect the water supply available to the Black Canyon, and asked if the CWCB would agree to limit transbasin diversions in order to maintain a water supply to the Black Canyon. In addition, the relationship with the proposed designation of the Gunnison River as a Wild River, aJld associated water rights, should be addressed. In Montrose, concemwas expressed that "calls" on the river;related to the Aspinall'Unit operation and the contract could impact values upstream, trigger collapse of agriculture uses, recreation uses, and other uses of water. Also in Montrose, participants stated that 300 cfs should not be settled on as an adequate amount of water to protect the Black Canyon, Better minimums in the summer would be 400 to 500cfs; this would help mitigate canyon flash floods and sediment problems as well as have other benefits. Further comments in Montrose recommended that the impacts of water deliveries to the Black Canyon or to endangered fish on junior and senior water rights be addressed in the analysis, The analysis should alSo address, where and at what cost, replacement water for junior rights would be obtained. Congressman Campbell expressed a need for hydrology studies showing effects on water right holders and water uses. According to the CRWCD, the NPS must state its intent regarding administration of its Federal reserved water right for the Black Canyon and must quantify resulting impacts on specific public and private water rights and uses. Impacts on water rights and water use upstream and downstream from water releases for endangered fish also must be addressed. The NPCA also stilted that effects on upstream water users should be addressed, particularly effects during dry years. They also asked how future Compact calls would affectthe proposed contract, and if the State of California should limit downstream calls J,mder the Compact to protect and ensure the timing of flows needed for endangered fish. recovery. Concerning water use in Colorado, they requested infonnation on how much of Colorado's remaining allocation would come from the Gunnison River and if BO~ would sign its Aspinall Unit water supplies to the CWCB to help fulfil! Colorado's remaining Compact allocation. The effect of existing downstream diversions or their interaction with the contraCt should be addressed, as well as the , effect of possible transfer of downstream rights to upstream dive~sions. The NPCA recommended that the proposed contract also provide water to meet the needs of a Wild River designation forthe GunnisonRiver and that any water right for this designation be ,addressed in the contract. The City of Colorado Springs discussed plans to turn the 300 cfs minimum flow ,through the Black Canyon into an instream flow water right and expressed concern about "stacking"other water. deliveries on top of this. The City also expressed concern that a section of the draft contract (paragraph 9.a) is selective subordination and asked whether this subordination needed adjudication in the State. water court, ' 28