BOARD00090 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. r I March 22, 2005 RECEIVED MAR 2 5 2005 ~Waler~ fJQa;.; . Keith Catlin Colorado Water Conservation Board 14291 6330 Rd Montrose. CO 8140 I RE: CWCB Proposed Instream Flow Filing for the Smith Fork of the Gunnison, case # 05/04/A-008 Dear Mr. Catlin, My concern is that the CWCB has used erroneous data for this proposed filing. During the March 16th informational meeting at Hotchkiss, Colo., I brought out the following information: I. The gauge station supposedly used to obtain this data is "high & dry", the cr.cek channel having become much lower than the gauge due to high water erosion. It has been this way for approximately 20 years. Mr. Hank La Valley. the area "water commissioner", will attest to this also. '2. .More importantly, the amount ofwater in this section of Smith Fork is not natural instream water. I believe the CWCB measured this water as Smith Fork water when in reality, it is not. The CWCB did not consider the trans- basin water diversion from Cwricanti Creek (the Head-Ferrier Ditch) that diverts water to the South Fork of the Smith Fork. This water is historically diverted from approximately June lit to approximately September 1 It of each year. The amount varies from % efs to 4 ers, dependent on the snow pack and time of year. The CWCB did not consider that this water is diverted from the Smith Fork bttwcen the North and South Smith Fork junction and tittle Coal Creek. This Occurs 800ut 1 mile upstream of 2nd Creek. ThC water is taken from Smith Fork, diverted to 2l1li Creek and then consumptively used on private properties with the majority oftbe return flow going into the Needle Rock Ditch, thus never going back into the Smith Forie. This diversion has occurred since the mid 1950's. Mr. laValley can attest to this as well. . 3. The Head-Ferrier decree is a private water right, thus can be sold and transferred. If sold, it could be taken from the South Smith Fork and be allowed to continue down Curricanti Creek to Marrow Point Reservoir. From there it could be taken by any of numerous water users on the Gunnison River i.e.: Uncom.pahgre Water Users, various ditches in the Delta area, Redlands Water & Power, etc. If this would happen, the instream flow in the proposed area would be considerably less that estimAted. 4. There was no consideration of the w8ter diverted from Virginia Creek, again below the North and South Smith Fork junction. I do not know the legal name for this consumptive diversion other than just called the Virginia Creek Ditch, which diverts water into the Crystal Creek drainage with return flow into Crawford Reservoir. page 1 .