Laserfiche WebLink
<br />#- The Steamboat Pilot: Water rights on City Council's table <br /> <br />Page 1 of2 <br /> <br />00D233 <br /> <br />The Steamboat Pilot <br /> <br />NEWS <br /> <br />Water rights on City Council's table <br /> <br />By Christine Metz, Staff Reporter <br /> <br />Monday, October 13, 2003 <br /> <br />The City Council will be asked to solidify its request in filing for recreational water rights at Tuesday night's meeting. <br /> <br />City staff wants direction on when they should file for a water right, how much water they should ask for, which <br />bodies of water they should file on and whether the request should be for a recreational in-channel diversion or a <br />minimum in-stream flow. <br /> <br />At a Sept. 23 meeting, the council expressed an increased sense of urgency to file for recreational water rights that <br />would preserve existing flows in the Yampa River. Council members wanted to stake a claim before 2004 and also <br />worried about the impacts of a yes vote on Referendum A, the state water issue on November's ballot. <br /> <br />At that meeting, city staff requested more time to come up with data on what the city should request and if those <br />needs could be met by using only the flows of nearby tributaries. <br /> <br />In a memo to the City Council, Parks, Open Space and Recreational Services Director Chris Wilson noted that the <br />Parks and Recreation Commission, the Citizens Advisory Committee working on the Yampa River Management Plan <br />and the draft of the community plan update all recommend acquiring water rights to protect flows in the Yampa <br />River. <br /> <br />Wilson advised the water right application should include the tributaries of Walton Creek, Burgess Creek, Fish Creek, <br />Spring Creek, Butcheknife Creek and Soda Creek. If flows from those streams do not meet the needs of the city, then <br />the memo recommended filing for a reasonable amount of water on the Yampa River. <br /> <br />City staff met with members of the Colorado Water Conservation Board and they were encouraged to proceed with <br />the application. The board also offered hydrological expertise and invited the city to attend a workshop in November <br />on how to better define the amount of water needed to support a "reasonable recreational experience," a key term in <br />the legal battle for recreational water rights. <br /> <br />The city most likely would have a more difficult time defending its request for a recreational in-channel diversion than <br />a minimum in-stream flow. The Colorado Water Conservation Board has said if the city applied for only a minimum <br />in-stream flow, the board would bear all the costs of filing and defending the water rights application. <br /> <br />Depending on what water right is filed, the city estimates that staff time alone could cost the city between $100,000 <br />and $200,000. At the Oct. 2 budget hearing, the staff did not set aside any money in 2004 for the filing of <br />recreational water rights. <br /> <br />At an Aug. 19 council meeting, attorney Tom Sharp, who sits on the Upper Yampa Conversancy District, said the <br />district would not support the city filing water rights on the main body of the Yampa. The district did vote to support <br />and even split the cost with the city if it would file water rights on just the tributaries. <br /> <br />In other business: <br /> <br />n The City Council will meet with the City Planning Commission to review the draft of the community plan. <br /> <br />http://www.steamboatpi10t.com!sectj on/news/ storypr/ 19680 <br /> <br />10/1512003 <br />