riparian vegetation and provide for sediment transport. 

 Channel maintenance flows are similar to maintaining 

 irrigation ditches so that irrigation water can flow freely. 

 While the irrigator uses mechanical means to keep his ditches 

 clean, the Forest Seirvice aims for channels that maintain 

 themselves naturally through instream flows. 



Flows for other resource needs include purposes as set 

 forth by Congress for wild and scenic rivers, fisheries, 

 wildlife, etc. Flows for the various purposes will be 

 negotiated with the Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission. 



Status of Negotiation with Reserved Water Rights Compact 

 Commission . The Forest Service is the only USDA agency with 

 reserved rights claims in the Clark Fork Basin. Negotiations 

 between the Reserved Water Rights Compact Commission and the 

 USDA have been initiated. Although this negotiation is 

 currently inactive, the USDA negotiator is still optimistic 

 that a compact can be developed by the parties. 



Current Water Related Litigation . In United States v. 

 Jesse , the federal government asserted that lands withdrawn 

 for the Pike and San Isabel national forests in Colorado 

 included the water necessary to maintain minimum instream 

 flows. The claim was based on a definition of favorable 

 conditions of water flow as identified in the Organic 

 Administration Act of 1897. The act requires streamflows 

 necessary to maintain stream channels so that hydrologic 

 function is not impaired. The decision against the United 

 States by the District Court was reversed and remanded by the 

 Colorado Supreme Court on the basis of recent advances in the 

 science of fluvial geomorphology. While the Colorado Supreme 

 Court has stated in United States v. City and County of 

 Denver that the Organic Act did not implicitly reserve water 

 necessary to maintain instream water flows in national 

 forests, it was also not excluded. Because the United States 

 has not attempted to prove instream flow rights in previous 

 litigation, the court found that the matter had not been 

 litigated and that the Forest Service should have its day in 

 court. While the court did not give the Forest Service 

 instream flow rights, it has provided the opportunity to 

 prove the case. 



■ g 



■ ft 



3-13 



