WSP11269 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

.- I. I I . I I . I .. . . . . I I I I. I Ie" , 1.)\)'1 5. The State of Colorado I/ould develop and submit for review a criteria and pro- cedure for storing and releasing flood flows. 6. The District would develop, and submit for review, procedures for assuring that only appropriate lands are irrigated and that only a reasonable amount of water was diyerted to project lands. During the course of the February 5, 1987 meeting, the State of Kansas questioned whether the operating principles permit project water to be used on lands other than those specifically stipulated in the operating principles, even if the total irrigated acreage did not exceed the maximum permitted by the prin- ciples. Following the February 5, 1987 meeting, extensive studies were done in accordance with the Bureau's understanding of the consensus reached during the February 5, 1987 meeting. Results of these studies were shown in the second draft report of the Trinidad Project Principle Review, dated December 1987. The interested parties met in Denver on February 16, 1988 to discuss the technical aspects of the second draft report and again on Apri 1 27, 1988 to discuss policy issues. During the course of these meetings, Kansas officials claimed that they had not agreed in the February 5, 1987 meeting to evaluate the transfer of water out of the Model Right and the storage of winter water under the direct flow decrees over the 1925 through 1957 period using the 1964 study as the bas is. Kansas part i cu 1 ar ly objected to the exc 1 us ion of an i n- depth analysis of these water rights administration practices over the 1979 through 1984 review period. Kansas questioned the use of a 19,500 acre-foot.~/ YThe 39,000 acre-foot joint-use pool is expected to fi 11 with sediment over the life of the project. The 1961 and 1964 Studies used 19,500 acre-feet as av~rage joint-use pool. 7