My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SarahKlahnSpeakingPointsSPCompact
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
SarahKlahnSpeakingPointsSPCompact
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:17:40 PM
Creation date
10/8/2007 10:27:51 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8420.500
Description
South Platte River Basin Task Force
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Date
7/16/2007
Author
Sarah A. Klahn Esq.
Title
Speaking Points Submitted to SPTF
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Data
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Speaking Points <br />South Platte River Compact <br />Governor's South Platte Task Force <br />Sarah A. Klahn, Esq. <br />July 16,2007 <br /> <br />1. What is the SPR Compact? <br /> <br />a. You've been given a copy. <br /> <br />b. Entered between Nebraska and Colorado in 1923 to apportion the river between the <br />states. <br /> <br />c. It was also the settlement of a lawsuit brought in 1916 by Nebraska irrigators against <br />Colorado irrigators demanding recognition of senior rights in Nebraska. <br /> <br />d. Though this was nominally a suit by the Western Ditch in Nebraska, it was financed by <br />the State of Nebraska to make a grab for waters of the river. <br /> <br />2. How does the SPR Compact operate? <br /> <br />a. This is what is important to District 64 users. <br /> <br />b. States that from 4/1 to 10/15 Colorado must curtail uses in District 64 only which are <br />junior to June 14, 1897, to make 120 cfs available at the state line. Art. IV.2. <br /> <br />c. \Vhile the Compact recognizes that climate irregularities can cause "fluctuations" in river <br />flow, deficiencies can't be caused by failure to administer water rights. Art. IV.5. <br /> <br />d. Also allows for Nebraska to build the Perkins County Canal to divert from Colorado in <br />the very lowest reach of District 64 near Ovid for use in Nebraska. <br /> <br />e. Compact was negotiated princip<;lily by DelphCarpenter and approved by Colorado and <br />Nebraska legislatures and Congress. <br /> <br />3. Why did the Colorado agree to put the onus on District 64 users to supplv water for <br />the state line and the Perkins County Canal? <br /> <br />a. There is one reason: The negotiators believed that there would always be sufficient flow <br />at the state line because of return flows from upstream irrigation ditches and reservoirs. <br /> <br />b. Carpenter reported to the governor and legislature in 1925 regarding the changed <br />conditions on the river from the headwaters to the state line and that they would supply <br />water to Nebraska, pp. 9-10 <br /> <br />c. He assured them: "The increase in flow at the state line will ultimately remove all <br />necessity for regulation." Page 20. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.