13all

• Board Meeting Date: 7/22/2008
• Description: ISF Section - Lower San Miguel Water Resources Planning Study
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Lower San Miguel yVa~er Resource Planning Study
Page 12
VI.G Local Residents
Many local residents attended the Public Meeting on May 29th, 2008. Their comments
were noted at the public meeting and many submitted written responses, which are attached to
this report in Appendix Six. As the Public Meeting jointly concerned the proposed Instream
Flow and this study, many of the public comments dealt with the proposed junior Instream flow.
There was also interest expressed in having additional public meetings held higher in the basin,
in Norwood or even Telluride, to address the Instream flow.
Other comments concerned the pre-1922 Johnson Ditch water rights. Questions were raised as
to the possibility that those water rights could be used to shield, or protect, existing users from a
compact call. The community inquired as to the CWCB's requirement or likelihood of following
the SWCD's recommendation through this study and if the CWCB would be further consulting
with the local community.
VII. Future Use Alternatives
Abroad range of alternatives were considered. These ranged from using the Uravan
Water Rights as decreed, i.e., no water right change needed, to abandoning all the Uravan Water
Rights to the stream. The following looks at the alternatives, the factors considered and draws
conclusions relative to the alternative.
VILA Use as Decreed
This alternative looks at using the Uravan Water Rights as they are presently decreed by
the water court. The place of use and type of use would not change.
Johnson Ditch Water Rights
Wells
Factors Considered
• Use of the wells at their decreed place of diversion and for their decreed
use would alleviate any need to go to water court for a change, thus the
period ofnon-use would not be an issue.
• There may be some utility to using some of the wells for their decreed
purpose (see M&I Use discussion)
• Many of the wells no longer exist or are no longer in use. There would
be an expense to putting them back into operation.
• Some of the wells are located in remote locations.
f nn~l»cinnc
Apparently, the Mineral Camp Well, the Uravan Well No. 1 and the Eula
Belle Mine Well were all obliterated during remediation activities. These wells
were generally in remote locations and their totaled decreed amounts were 0.3 76
cfs and they were rather junior in priority. They were all decreed in 1971 with
appropriation dates of 1958, 1959 and 1961. Therefore, they have little use as
decreed.
~Iuly 2008