Laserfiche WebLink
SOME FOLKS SAY WE NEED MORE "W ATER MANAGEMENT" , BUT THAT ONLY <br />WORKS WHEN THERE IS PLENTY OF WATER <br />Increasing evidence that 1970's - 1990's we re the wettest period in many years <br />o <br />Water management worked then because there was plenty to go around <br />o <br />When there is a shortage, then the prior ity system "manages" the water by allocating <br />o <br />it in order of seniority <br />Anything else would just be taking water from senior right s and giving it to juniors, <br />o <br />which is illegal. <br />To the extent we can vary from strict administration of prio rities, it is done under <br />o <br />plans for augmentation, which allow out of priority diversions that do not injure <br />seniors. <br />WINTER DEFERRALS ARE REALLY COMPLEX, AND LIKELY TO INJURE SENIOR <br />RIGHTS. <br />If they can work, it will be very complicated and they need to go through water court- <br />o <br />not be left to the Division Engineer <br />No paper fill of senior reservoirs without the owner's consent - if the reservoir does <br />o <br />not fill, how do you find the water to fill it. <br />Even is a private deal could be made, what about the lost return flows for downstream <br />o <br />rights? <br />Many ways that this can injure seni or rights. It is not an easy fix. <br />o <br />DON'T RUSH TO CONCLU SION THAT WATER COURT PROCESS IS BROKEN <br />This has been raised before (10-15 year s ago) and Water Court clerks provided <br />o <br />statistics <br />96% of all cases resolved by Referee without formal process <br />4% of all cases re-referred to Water Judge <br />1% of all cases went to trial <br />I think the Water Court process works pretty well. It is only the biggest cases that <br />o <br />cost a lot, because they involve lots of water and/or major issues of law, and those are <br />the ones that we hear about <br />Please get all of the facts - don't rely on em otion or perception - before changing this <br />o <br />process <br />WHAT CAN BE DONE? <br />Need more water storage and recharge, and wells need to be in decreed augmentation <br />o <br />plans <br />Whatever state can do to help is good. <br />Where will the money come from? <br />Bijou would support a cut-off date of 1974, wh ich would mean that current depletions <br />o <br />from pumping before 1974 would not have to be replaced. It has been in all of the <br />decreed plans. Fair to apply that rule to everyone. <br />