WSP12200 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

will be made available from the Colorado VValer Resources and Power Development J'\uthority to add addi- c,) tional statiom, which are needed for (:J the lotal water administration of the -.. ri~rs in the state Or the office of the ~ State Engineer. ollo ~ CROP CENSUS SURVEY The Repayment Contract betv.'een the Dislrict and Ihe US Bureau of Recla- malion requires that a Crop Censu" Survey must be taken each ~ar to identify the number of acres whith benefit from the supplemental waters at the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, and the type and quantity of crops grown. The first such SUM.')' was conducted in 1983 when the District entered into a Cooperative Program with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Colorado Department of Agriculture, to avoid duplication of surveys and reduce the number of timf'S individual farmers had to answer the same ques- tions. Survt'yS were done under the direction of Mr. Charles Hudson, Statistician in Charge of the Colorado Office, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Mrs. Barbaralu Smith, who served as Supervisor. The Cooperati~ Pro- gram was well received, and the responses elo.:ce1fent. Regulations require a complete Crop Census Survey every four ~af'j, rather than the "random samples" which were conducted Or the District in 1984. 1985 and 1986. A full survey was conducted in 1987, and a random sample in 1988. In 1990 the project was coordinated under the direction of Mr. Charlf'S Hudson, and Mrs. Toni Gonzales of the District Staff The program this ~ar was handled entirely Or Ihe Denver Office. This permitted them to make a complete survey, and reduce the number of times area farmers had to respond to questions. As in the previous year, the response was e'<.ceJlent, and the results very complete. The iolJowing is illustrative of the type of crops grown, acres and rields; 18 CROP Alfalfa Corn Sorghum ........'heal Onions Beans Melons Soybeans Tomatoes Peppef'j Cucumbers ACRES M,378 20,140 6,860 6,330 1,558 4,489 2,092 500 207 245 118 YIELD 281,875 ton 1,867,350 cv.t 548,800 bu 370,305 bu 580,260 cwt 95,235 CWI 146,811 CWI 16,000 bu 1,863 ton 14,455 (Wt 15,340 cwt LEGISLATION \\'ater in the semi-arid Arkansas Valley i~ undoubtedly the masl preciou~ commodity available, and, thus, the most guarded. As can be seen in other parts of the Annual Report, the availability of ~tored water at the righl time, and supplememal water for Ihe nati~ decree~, spell the difference belween the Valley prior to Ihe com- pletion of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project and the ability for cities, farmers, and industries, to make long- range plans predicated upon stored water. The protection and use oi Ihis critical natural resource requires that the District be ever vigilant, to be sure that all operations are done in accord- ance with Colorado \Miler Laws and the Operating Principals of the project. During 1989 a number of Bills were introduced in the Colorado General As-.embly to amend existing water laws, and the DiSlrict monitored each of them 10 assure that the changes would not adversely affect the operation of waler decree<; in the Valley. Mr. Ralph Adkins, a member of the Board of Directors, o;erved as Chainnan of the Colorado Water Congress legislative Comminee, and members of that organization devoted countless hours monitoring water legislation to develop concepts which would benefit the entire Stale of Colorado. fortunately, few pieces of legislation were introduced in the Congress of the United States. Representati\.f>S from the District worl..ed with the Water Resources Congress and National Water Resources Association to monitor federal legislation, and Rules and Regulations, to not only assure compliance, but also 10 express opinions of the District. LITIGATION Water laws adopted by the Colorado General Assembly down through the \fears are complex, and subject to constant interpretation in cases filed in the seven \Miter Courts in Colorado. Attorneys for the District, Howard Holme, Kevin Pran and Stephen leonhardt, of the law firm of Fairfield and \M:>ods in Denver, were kepI busy in 1990 when membef'j oj the Board of Directors, after careful review and consideration, authorized the legal Counsel to file poSitions in a number of court cases. The District is required to transport its Fryingpan-Arkansas Project water approximately 300 miles along the Arkansas River from near leadville to Lamar. Any changes along that stretch, including tributaries, have 10 be researched 10 assure they will not adve~ly affect the delivery of that water. A number of major cases ifM)lved the District in Division 2, and Attorneys ior the District utilized the expert engineering talem in the firm of Wright Water Engineers, in Denver, who prepared and presented expert testimony for the District. The goal of the Dislrict in each of Ihese cases is to protect the decrees of the District, and hopefully, to establish case law, which will reduce the necessity for such cases in the future and still permit the best type of water management and administration. In 1985, the State of Kansas filed a law suit in the United States Supreme Court alleging that the State of Colorado had not operated in full conformity wilh the Arkansas River Compdct of 1948. Subsequently, the Office of the Attorney General in Colorado appointed Attorneys David Robbins and Dennis Montgomery to represent the state in that maner, and also the Slate legislature provided funds to pennit the Attorney General to retain services of outstanding Engineering Consultants. The U.s. Supreme Court accepted jurisdiction of the law suit on March 24, 1986, and appointed the Honorable VVade H. McCree, Jr., a professor at the University of ,\1ichigan Law School, to be the Special Master. Judge McCree held a conference in his offices with Attorneys ior the IwO states and set iorth a set of procedures and a time- table for prose<uting the case.