WSP10471 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e . e d. Hindry No.7. This priority has an appropriation for 7.21 cfs and it is assumed that all of this water can be diverted whenever in priority. A small portion of this water right is owned by the Colorado Water Conservation Board. e. The Lewis and Strouse Priority No. 13. The 100 inches belonging to Morrison will be administered in accordance with the terms and conditions of Case No. 82CW425. For the remaining 100 inches it is assumed that there would be no monthly or annual volumetric limits or ditch losses imposed. However, the allowable diversions would be calculated by multiplying the amount in priority by the depletion factors used in Case No. 82CW425. f. The Robert Lewis Priority No. 19. For the purpose of running the Model, it was assumed that 2.00 cfs could be diverted by Priority No. 19 without limitation whenever in priority. The decree signed by the Referee on October 25,1988 was more generous for the 179.525 inches transferred by the Mt. Carbon Metropolitan District. Without doing any precise analysis, approximately twice as much, or 4.8 cfs should have been assumed for the month of June and lesser amounts for other months to be consistent with Case No. 84CW22 I. This would reduce the amount that could be diverted by the State's storage rights in Bear Creek Lake. That may be counter-balanced by being too generous in projecting diversions for other non-transferred water rights. SOUTH PLATIE RIVER CAU.s Whether or not the excess water, physically available in Bear Creek, can be stored in Bear Creek ReselVoir depends on the downstream South Platte River calls which are senior to the CWCB's storage rights. Call records are available at the Division Engineer's office for the 1949-1957 period, which are summarized in Appendix B. The question arises whether or not the river calls would be similar in a repeat of this 9-year period. Certainly, there have been transmountain diversions that increase the physicaIwater available to some of the ditches, which could change the calling appropriation. Two Forks Reservoir, if and when constructed, could cause additional rebound calls that would affect the legal availability of water to CWCB's storage rights in Bear Creek. Also, Denver can be expected to exercise exchanges from the Metro/Denver wastewater plant to Strontia Springs that could tighten up the administration in the Upper South Platte River reach. The construction of the Narrows Dam would decrease the storable flows of the CWCB storage rights. Because of the uncertainties of future developments regarding the construction of either the Two Forks Dam or the Narrows Dam, it is assumed that the South Platte calls will remain the same as they were during the 1949-1957 period for the purpose of quantifying the storable flows of the CWCB water righ ts. 195'1 89..Q26.00W 6