WSP09097 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

..-j i:'- "'... ......, ~ 2. Article III of the Rio Grande River Compact is silent as to the C~ . allocation of the 10,000 acre foot credit. The water users along the Conejos River feel that the full la,OOO acre feet should be allocated to 35 them, especially if the courts decide that the Compact establishes sep- Paragraph lIE of the Proposed Rules and Regulations would allocate the arate delivery commitments on each river system based upon the schedules. credit on the same percentage that each river's delivery requirements bears to the. sum of such requirements. 3. Should some form of credit be determined benefiting the Conejos River System, since it is contended that water, especially from well diversion in theConejos Basin, drains into the Rio Grande River drainage system and is therefore lost to the Conejos River system? 4. What are the "historic uses" that the Compact attempts to pre- serve, especially in relation to wells and post-Compact reservoirs con- structed in the San Luis Valley? Must the wells be governed by the strict appropriation doctrine or can some type of accommodation be created, re- flecting the significant impact that the wells have on the Valley's economy, despite the Water Rights Determination and Administration Act of 1969 affecting wells hydraulically connected to the natural stream. At this point in time, it is difficult to give a clear idea about how the litigation will proceed and which issues will become focal points. The importance of this litigation cannot be stressed too highly, because if the aforementioned issues are decided, much of the uncertainty involving water rights in the San Luis Valley will be answered. The only remaining major problems will involve the closed basin system and the mechanics of integration of surface and ground water use.