Groundwater Flooding

Duane Woodward from the Water Management Committee provided background on progress of the Groundwater Flooding subgroup. The four main points that the subgroup are looking at are: 1) historic river stage and how the Cooperative Agreement may change the river stage; 2) historic groundwater stage and comparing this to river stage; 3) groundwater recharge and the effects of precipitation on groundwater; and 4) the extent of the groundwater flooding problem.

Glen Sanders continued the groundwater flooding discussion by addressing the methodologies that could be used to analyze the issue. Glen started by bringing the group up-to-speed on several definitions and formulas commonly used in hydrology and examples of output from computer models. Glen described the monitoring well alignment that will be used to monitor groundwater levels in some ongoing studies. The wells occur in transects perpendicular to the river and extend for two to three miles out from the river. Twenty-six data loggers have been installed in these wells. Placement of the data loggers was based the well's proximity to wet meadows and other potential problem areas.

The question arose as to the effectiveness of estimating groundwater levels at distances greater than those wells that are being monitored with data loggers. Both Glen and Duane responded by saying that estimates can be made using computer models. The point was made that precipitation levels have been above average since the 1980's and that this has led to increased basement flooding but that the problem has existed since at least the 1960's. Because precipitation and irrigation can affect groundwater levels, irrigation practices and timing will need to be addressed in the areas around the observation wells.

John Altenhofen suggested the need to continue this monitoring longer than one year. Several in the group agreed. Doug Robotham suggested that the subgroup put together a proposal for extending the monitoring and suggested that a demonstration project could be used to gather additional data. One problem with this as addressed by Glen and Duane is that most of the data loggers are on loan from the USGS.

Ralph Morgenweck asked members of the Governance Committee and others from Nebraska what they thought Nebraska would do about the groundwater problem if there were no Cooperative Agreement or Program. Rhodell Jameson, Co-Chair of the Land Committee, commented that farmers hands have been tied since the 1985 Farm Bill made it exceedingly difficult for farmers and others to drain wetlands and other low areas. These areas continue to feed water into the water table. Larry Todd reminded the group that there are two issues related to high groundwater levels 1) water in basements and 2) flooded farmland.

Ralph and others thanked the subgroup and said that they felt the subgroup was heading in the right directions. Ralph again pointed out that the intent of the Governance Committee to use existing and new information to develop a Program that helps endangered species but does not exacerbate high water problems.

Tax Issue

Dayle Williamson handed out the latest "position statement" on the payment of taxes for Program lands. He noted that they are continuing to keep it simple.

Doug Robotham handed out a statement from Colorado regarding the tax issue. Doug noted that Colorado doesn't want to separate the tax issue from other important issues such as Land Ownership Entity and Third Party Impacts. However, Colorado would agree to pay taxes or payment in lieu of taxes for Program Lands subject to 1) assurances that the Entity be established in such a way that contributors can recover their equity if the Program fails, and 2) the tax issue be revisited based on the results of the third party impacts analysis (see attached letter dated March 12, 1999). Doug noted that Colorado realized that there is responsibility as a landowner and that Colorado wants to insure that Program Lands are fairly assessed.

Considerable discussion ensued regarding the wording of a Governance Committee statement on the tax issue. Consensus was reached that the following statement accurately expresses the Governance Committee's current position on paying property taxes:

"When land is acquired by the Program and held by the land ownership entity, regardless of whether the landowner thereafter is a tax exempt entity, the Program shall pay or provide for the payment of real property taxes or an equivalent amount. Such taxes or equivalent amount shall be determined each year using the assessments and levies in effect at the time such taxes are due or would be due if the property were owned by a tax paying entity."

The Governance Committee recognizes that a mechanism should be created to recover equity in land if the Program should fail, that third party impacts and their relationship to property tax payments still must be addressed, and that the committee may reconsider property tax payments if it is felt the counties were placing an unfair tax burden on Program lands.

A member of the audience asked about how NPPD pays their taxes or equivalent to taxes. Brian Barels indicated they pay a fixed PILT and 5% of their revenue. The 5% varies with electric rates and is intended to reflect economic times (see attached information).

Gus Michaels from CPAC requested that he be provided a final copy of the tax issue position statement so that he can take it to their next meeting. CPAC is currently working on their position statement regarding the tax issue. If available for the next GC meeting, he will present CPAC's position statement.

Executive Director's Report

Dale Strickland reported that no new disbursements, contracts, or agreements had been completed during the past month. Dale reported that Hazen and Sawyer had been selected to conduct the Land Committee's Third Party Impact Study.

Committee Reports

Water Management Committee

John Lawson provided the report for the Water Management Committee. Boyle Engineering has narrowed the initial 77 alternatives to 36 alternatives in seven categories (Reservoirs, Water Conservation, Reuse, Incentive Based Reductions in Agricultural Water Use, Ground Water, Systems Integration and Management, and Watershed Management). A more detailed analysis of the alternatives will be made available in draft memoranda, one memorandum for each category, to be issued beginning May 7 and all information will be available by May 28. Comments from the WMC will be due back to Boyle June 21. The states plan to conduct public meetings to review the short list of alternatives. Each state will be in charge of conducting the meetings while Boyle will provide a description of the alternatives screening process and will present the shortlist of alternatives. There will be one meeting in each state and possibly one extra meeting will be held in the North Platte Valley region in either Scottsbluff, Nebraska, or Torrington, Wyoming. The states will use public input obtained from the meetings to assist in their review of the draft memoranda. Boyle will consider State comments on the report and issue the draft Water Conservation/Supply Reconnaissance Study report on August 9, 1999.

Lawson reported on the need for a demonstration project. As part of their contract, Boyle is to identify potential projects. This will be done in the future with the help of a committee subgroup. The Water Management Committee would like a project that can be implemented rapidly.

Lawson reported that developing the Tracking/Accounting/Monitoring milestone necessitated an evaluation of existing laws. The committee also needs to know how the current state water administrators are implementing those laws. The committee is planning a meeting with "water administrators" from each state. A Water Management Committee subgroup will prepare an outline for the administrators on how the meeting will be conducted. This topic will be further discussed at the Cheyenne meeting.

Work Plan/Schedule - The Conservation/Supply Study is on schedule. All but one workshop has been held. The last workshop will be June 14th and will include information from the State's public meetings on alternatives. The Tracking/Accounting project will not be ready by this July (as directed in the Milestones) but should be ready by the end of the Cooperative Agreement. This will not allow for demonstration projects. The remainder of the committee's work will be completed by the end of year three. Lawson indicated that regarding Milestone W13-3, Colorado has done their part and Wyoming and Nebraska still need work. Lawson suggested the Water Management Committee "peer review" the work of the states in this area unless instructed otherwise by the Governance Committee.

Technical Committee

Jay Maher and Dale Strickland reported on the Technical meeting held in Lakewood, Colorado, March 2 and 3, 1999. The Technical Committee has completed a draft Charter. Jay handed out the Charter and requested comments. The Committee will submit a final draft of the Charter for approval at the April Governance Committee meeting.

The committee spent considerable time discussing the relationship of Milestones R1-1, R2-1, and R3-1. While the Cooperative Agreement places responsibility for R1-1 and R3-1 with the Fish and Wildlife Service and R2-1 with the Technical Committee, the three milestones are completely interdependent. The Technical Committee has gone as far as possible on R2-1 until the other two milestones are complete. The Service and the Committee has developed a strategy for working together to complete the two milestones. The tern and plover subgroup of the Technical Committee will meet with the Service in Grand Island, Nebraska, on April 6 and 7 to begin work on R3-1. The end product of this process will be a plan for the Program's monitoring and research elements.

The Technical Committee is also working on a report that will provide the EIS Team with information of monitoring and research related to the program. This product will be less detailed than the Program document discussed above but will provide sufficient detail for the EIS.

Land Committee

Rhodell Jameson and Vernon Nelson provided a report on Land Committee activities. The Committee concurred with the selection of Hazen and Sawyer for the Third Party Impacts Study. However, the Committee is concerned with two issues. They are concerned that Hazen and Sawyer not just use of EIS baselines in their analysis; and, they are concerned with the use of contingent evaluation methods for estimating the impact of the Program on the local economy.

Don Batie passed out the latest draft of the Habitat Criteria Guidelines. Don indicated that his subcommittee has modified the habitat category and added riparian woodlands. Don requested that the Governance Committee provide him with comments by the next Governance Committee meeting.

A request for proposals have been sent to potential contractors to assist the Land Ownership Subcommittee with the project approved by the Governance Committee at the last meeting. The subcommittee will participate in the selection process. Proposals are due to the Executive Director by March 17, 1999.

Larry Wells, chair of the Mapping Subcommittee, thanked Governance Committee members for attending Land Committee meeting the previous evening. He indicated he is assisting in the coordination of aerial photography with 8 well transects mentioned in the discussion on groundwater flooding.

Third Party Impacts- Hazen and Sawyer was selected by Selection Committee which included the EIS Team, Land Committee, Finance Committee, and the Executive Director. Curt Brown presented a proposed work schedule for the project at the Land Committee meeting the previous evening.

Dave Dahlgren, Central District Water Users, spoke in favor of the Cooperative Agreement and gave Governance Committee a position statement (Attached).

Mr. Carroll Sheldon read a statement criticizing the conduct of the Land Committee meeting the previous evening (Attached). Ralph Morgenweck attempted to respond, but Mr. Sheldon left the room.

Ralph did respond that there are many possible formats for meetings and that the Governance Committee has been experimenting with meeting formats and Land Committee has the ability also to experiment. Ralph indicated that the format appears designed to improve opportunity for public input. Ralph congratulated the Co-chairs of the Land Committee for an outstanding job.

Brian Barels reported that media coverage of the February Land Committee meeting might have confused the public on Programs goals for flow shortage reductions. The Service was quoted as saying 130-150,000 acre feet is all we need. Ralph will work with Dale and Outreach Committee to clarify the issue.

Dan Luecke suggested the need for a different vehicle than the Land Committee for public involvement in the Cooperative Agreement in central Nebraska. Ralph suggested that Dale work with the Outreach committee to develop discussion of public involvement process for the next Governance Committee meeting.

Vernon Nelson indicated that he has received lots of positive feedback from members attending the Land Committee Meeting the previous evening. Vernon asked if they could get support from the Governance Committee to help people realize the importance of the Cooperative Agreement effort.

Outreach Committee

Jim Cook described and handed out brochures prepared by the committee. Jim also indicated that the committee is planning newspaper tabloid insert describing the Cooperative Agreement. A newsletter insert will be done with some agriculture organizations. Jim described other media contacts including television and radio. He indicated that the committee is working with Rita Sudman, Water Education Foundation, exploring the possible production of a video, including costs and messages.

Jim introduced Jeff Buettner, CNPPID, as the new Outreach Committee Chair and asked that the Governance Committee approve Jeff's addition to the Committee. Governance Committee added Jeff by consensus.

Jeff read three possible messages for a 12-15 minute video. The messages included 1) a description of diverse uses of Platte River water in the three states; 2) the river's role in the life cycle of the target species; and 3) the Cooperative Agreement and its role in the first two items. Larry Todd suggested a draft script be written and offered with a funding proposal. Interior is considering funding the video.

Lynn Holt handed out an additional brochure in blue line brochure and requested editorial suggestions.

Dan Luecke thinks that the Governance Committee should go on record in support of program in our Outreach material.

Finance Committee

Committee Chair Mike Besson indicated that two meetings (one by conference call) had been held in the last month. The Committee also conducted interviews of foundations.

Reimbursement Policy - The Committee recommend a change adding actual expenses as an option under Per Diem and approval was given.

Funding Agreement-The Committee recommended adoption of the Land Committee and Outreach Committee funding agreements covering the next three months and approval was given.

Foundation-Majority opinion was to select the Nebraska Community Foundation (NCF) because they are local. Minority opinion felt that the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation (NFWF) was best because of experience and because they focus on natural resources and their ability to leverage funds nationally. Doug Robotham pointed out that the Colorado Water Conservation Board felt strongly that NFWF was best choice in January. Doug indicated a willingness to go with the NCF for the period of the Cooperative Agreement. He also indicated a need to get approval from Colorado Water Conservation Board. Larry Todd stressed the need for leveraging funds and that long term we need NFWF type fundraising capability. Consensus was reached on the selection of the NCF with the caveat that Doug will let Dale know when he gets concurrence form Colorado Water Conservation Board.

The Habitat Criteria Subcommittee proposed review of the habitat management methods. Mike Besson informed them that the Finance Committee decided to have WEST do the literature review and assist with the technical meeting.

Whooping Crane Model

The Fish and Wildlife Service presented an update on the whooping crane model. The Service is incorporating recent data into the model. They are also evaluating possible biases in the model associated with channel width and depth. The Mid-Continent Ecology Center in Fort Collins, Colorado will assist with the evaluation.

Several people expressed concern with the timing of the evaluation. There was also questions regarding the effect of the evaluation on target flows. The Service pointed out that a Biological Opinion on the Program will be necessary and they need to use the best available information.

Report on Milestones

Colorado - Nothing new to report except good news with appropriation committee. Doug indicated he has the support needed for appropriations from Colorado's trust fund for endangered species. He indicated he would know if additional funds are available by May.

Nebraska -Dayle Williamson indicated nothing new to report. He indicated the Land Committee is making excellent progress and products should be completed in six months.

Wyoming -Mike Besson indicated nothing new to report. He anticipates a depletion mitigation program draft from a state committee by May. Wyoming will make a report to the Water Management Committee in June.

Fish and Wildlife Service -The Service has returned the draft baseline report (R1-1) to Woodward Clyde Consulting. The Service will meet with the contractor in the near future and develop a schedule for revision.

R3-1- The Service has drafted a process for determining biological response. The Service will meet April 6-7 with the Technical Committee's least tern working group. The Service will report back to Technical Committee in April.

EIS -Bureau of Reclamation will sign a contract with Hazen and Sawyer soon so they can begin work on the Third Party Impact Study. An evaluation of ground water flooding is being coordinated with the Water Management Committee. An EIS report on the issue will be released in late April, early May. The relationship of the Program and the flooding problem is a public education need.

NPPD

The management plan for Cottonwood will be coordinated with the Governance Committee. Brian Barels asked for direction on how the Governance Committee wants to proceed with consultation.

Future Governance Committee Meetings

April 21 - Cheyenne, Wyoming, Room 1699 of the Herschler Building

June 2 - Lakewood, Colorado, Fish and Wildlife Service Office

July 14 -Kearney, Nebraska

Adjourn

The meeting was adjourned at approximately 4 PM.