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
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Executive Summary ................................................................................ 1
II . Introduction .......................................................................................... 2
III. Background .......................................................................................... 2
A. Consent Decree ............................................................................... 3
B. Uravan Water Trust .......................................................................... 3
C. Memorandum of Understanding ........................................................... 3
D. Water Rights Historical Use vs. Abandonment .......................................... 4
E. Armbruster Report -Uravan Water Rights, Historical Use Analysis ................ 4
F. Lower San Miguel River Water Resources Planning Study ........................... 5
IV. Uravan Water Rights Historical Use Analysis -Armbruster Report ........................ 5
A. Miguel Power Company Canal Rights .................................................... 5
B. Johnson Ditch ................................................................................. 5
C. Wells .......................................................................................... 6
V. Uravan Water Rights Summary .................................................................. 6
A. Miguel Power Company Canal Rights .................................................... 6
B. Johnson Ditch ................................................................................. 6
C. Mineral Camp Well .......................................................................... 6
D. Uravan Well No. 1, "G-Block", and No. 2, "F-Block" ................................. 6
E. Tabeguache Wells, No. l & No. 2 ......................................................... 7
F. Eula Belle Mine Well ........................................................................ 8
VI. Local Public Input and Consultations ............................................................ 8
A. Montrose County ............................................................................ 9
B . Mustang Water Authority .................................................................. 9
C. Norwood ..................................................................................... 11
D. Upper Basin ................................................................................. 11
E. Recreation .................................................................................... 11
F. Local Water Users .......................................................................... 11
G. Local Residents ............................................................................. 12
VII. Future Use Alternatives .......................................................................... 12
A. Use As Decreed ............................................................................ 12
B. Instream Flow Use ......................................................................... 14
C. Domestic, Municipal and Industrial Use ................................................ 16
D. Sale of Uravan Water Rights ............................................................. 18
E. Relinquish the Uravan Water Rights to the Stream .................................... 18
F. Combination of Alternatives ............................................................. 19
VIII. Future Use Recommendation ................................................................... 20
A. Preliminary Recommendation ............................................................ 21
~Iuly 2008