Green River Basin Advisory Group
Meeting Record
Desert School Gymnasium, Wamsutter, WY
July 11, 2000
Welcome
Facilitator Joe Lord welcomed the group and the meeting was opened at 5:10 p.m. The
overall meeting agenda was reviewed, followed by an introduction of all attendees. A
sign-in sheet was passed around to record attendance.
Planning Team Issues
Jon Wade provided a rundown of the upcoming meeting schedule:
Date | Town | Time | Location |
August 8, 2000 | Lyman | 5:00 | Courthouse |
September 12, 2000 | Kemmerer | 5:00 | TBA |
October 10, 2000 | Green River | 5:00 | TBA |
November 7, 2000 | Farson | 5:00 | TBA |
December 12, 2000 | Rock Springs | 5:00 | TBA |
Mr. Wade briefly discussed how the BAG would be able to review technical memoranda.
The Planning Team (WWDC, SEO, and WRDS) will review first drafts of the memos.
After review and editing, the memos will be made available for review by the BAG.
Exactly how the memos will be made available is not yet defined.
Mr. Wade briefly discussed the NE Wyoming BAG meetings. A slide was presented
showing the structure of the two BAGs in NE Wyoming, contrasting them to our own
Green River organization.
Mr. Wade then introduced Bruce Brinkman to describe the State's position on Riverware,
as promised at the last BAG meeting. Bruce described the Riverware model as a program
somewhere in between the spreadsheet model currently being constructed for the basin
plans and a full-blown simulation model. However, he acknowledged that Riverware is
primarily set up to model hydropower and river operations at a larger scale, with less
emphasis on smaller users (i.e. irrigation diversions). It is more of a management model
and less a physical model. The model also currently does not take into account water
rights.
Much discussion ensued on the value of the spreadsheet model currently being
constructed by the consultant. In particular, questions arose regarding the use of averages
to determine whether shortages exist. Mr. Tyrrell offered that "average" conditions were
only one case that would be modeled; wet and dry year scenarios are also planned.
Additional questions arose regarding the detail of diversion modeling, and whether
double rights were being considered for those diversions early enough in priority to divert
them. Mr. Tyrrell indicated that if diversion records showed double rights being diverted,
and the effect of such diversions were seen in the next downstream gage, then yes they
are. It was reiterated that the spreadsheet model does not simulate individual diversions,
but follows water consumption "down the river" based on irrigated lands and gage data.
Large diversions with good records are modeled individually while smaller diversions are
"lumped" for ease in tracking. In essence, the model will identify reaches or segments of
waterways where water supply is in excess of, or short of, demands.
Consultant Update
Mr. Pat Tyrrell of States West gave a brief project update and stated that he would like to
go over the entire basin plan at the September meeting in Kemmerer, utilizing the full
three hours. BAG members were asked to be thinking about future water use
opportunities for discussion at that meeting.
The consultant topic for the evening, Little Snake River Depletions for the Yampa PBO,
was introduced by John Shields. Essentially, the Yampa River Programmatic Biological
Opinion (PBO) is intended to provide some regulatory certainty for water users in the
Yampa River Basin (of which the Little Snake River is a part). It would eliminate the
need for project-by-project Endangered Species Act compliance. To do this, the PBO
authors need estimates of Wyoming's current and projected depletions to the Wyoming
part of the basin. A "block" of future depletions is to be estimated, which is not intended
to serve as a "cap" on future use. Rather, the block provides an increment of depletion to
allow time to measure the response of threatened and endangered fishes to Recovery
Program activities.
Go to the PowerPoint Presentation
Pat Tyrrell then provided the Consultant's current estimates of existing and projected
future depletions in draft form for review and comment. Using numbers generated from
plan estimates, in addition to review of USBR Consumptive Uses and Losses Reports, the
High Savery Environmental Impact Statement document, and ongoing basin projects,
current depletions are estimated to be:
----------------------------------------------------------
Current Use Depletion, AF
----------------------------------------------------------
Municipal (In-Basin) 76
City of Cheyenne 14,400
Agricultural 18,893
High Savery Reservoir 7,724
Diked Wetlands 284
Small Reservoirs 49
Total 41,426
---------------------------------------------------------
Future estimates of depletions are as follows:
-----------------------------------------------------------
Future Use Depletion, AF
-----------------------------------------------------------
Municipal (In-Basin) 88
City of Cheyenne 22,656
Agricultural 18,893
High Savery Reservoir 7,724
Diked Wetlands 284
Small Reservoirs 663
Dolan Mesa Canal 2,656
Total 52,964
-----------------------------------------------------------
Little discussion was held on the estimate of current depletions. However, comments
were heard that future depletions need to consider all possible projects. In particular, the
Little Snake Conservation District has hopes of constructing numerous stock and wildlife
reservoirs within the basin, and doesn't want to be "capped" if the future block of uses
turns out to be a firm limit. Further meetings will be held with representatives of the
Little Snake Conservation District prior to finalizing the depletion estimates for submittal
for inclusion in the PBO.
Additional Presentations
Inland West Watershed Reconnaissance Project-Randy Davis, USFS
Mr. Randy Davis of the Bridger-Teton National Forest gave a presentation on the "Inland
West Watershed Reconnaissance" project being undertaken by the Regional Foresters of
the four Inland West regions of the USFS. Mr. Davis indicated this work was still in the
data gathering stage. He also indicated that at this point, except for two watersheds that
provide municipal water to Pinedale and Afton, all watersheds on the Forest have
fisheries as their designated uses.
This work, described as a "resource evaluation" rather than a "management program" by
Mr. Davis, was displayed on three maps with watersheds delineated to the 6th level
hydrologic unit code (HUC). The maps showed Watershed Vulnerability (natural
vulnerability to such features as landslides), Geomorphic Integrity
(erosional/aggradational imbalance) and Water Quality (possible impairment, similar to
TMDL determination).
Color-coded areas, by HUC, indicated whether a watershed was of concern, not of
concern, or of uncertain or inconclusive status primarily due to a lack of data. Many
watersheds fell into the third category as Mr. Davis stated existing data were thin and
much work remained to be done.
A questioner asked if private inholdings were shown on the maps. Mr. Davis said no.
Another questioner asked about the two watersheds that were indicated of concern related
to water quality, and asked how that determination was made. Mr. Davis indicated
determination was based on experience of the observer. The questioner responded that
the State of Wyoming required "credible data" before impairment could be concluded.
To this, Mr. Davis replied that the intent was not to establish TMDLs based on the
existing information; rather their work was intended to identify areas for further study,
and to prioritize their work.
Wyoming's Conservation Program-Ron Vore & Sue Lowry, SEO
A planned presentation on the State Engineer's Office Water Conservation Program, and
proposed changes to State Water Law, was postponed until the August BAG meeting in
Lyman.
Closing
The meeting was adjourned at 8:00 p.m.
|