Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Table 1. Summary of instream flow/natural lake level appropriations as of <br />January 1, 1985. <br /> <br />Water <br />division <br /> <br />Number of <br />stream segments <br />decreed/undecreed <br /> <br />Number of <br />stream mi 1 es <br />decreed/undecreed <br /> <br />Number of <br />natural <br />1 a ke s <br /> <br />1 86/57 652.2/392.9 35 <br />2 123/0 589.6/0 85 <br />3 10114 805.1/44.7 48 <br />4 184/20 1120.7/219.2 84 <br />5 217/60 1158.7/402.8 141 <br />6 140/0 594.6/0 43 <br />7 78/3 625.3/26.9 49 <br />Subtotal 930/144 5546.2/1086.5 485 <br />TOTAL 1074 6632.7 485 <br /> <br />(Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board, December 15, 1986). <br /> <br />periodic monitoring of streamflows within the stream segments may not occur, <br />making compliance difficult to evaluate. The CWCB envisions the establishment <br />of a program for monitoring the most critical streams or stream segments, <br />since continual monitoring of 1,100 streams is probably not feasible. The <br />plan would include provisions for installing gauges and assigning an appro- <br />priate agency, perhaps DOW, to monitor the gauges (Gene Jensock, CWCB; pers. <br />comm., April 1, 1987). <br /> <br />PRIVATE APPROPRIATION OF INSTREAM FLOWS <br /> <br />Opportunity <br /> <br />The opportunity for appropriation of water for instream flow purposes is <br />apparently an open question in Colorado. The likelihood of success of private <br />appropri a tors to fo 11 ow State procedural requi rements to record an appropri a- <br />tion for instream flows is unknown. The ability to make such an appropriation <br />is not specifically prohibited by law, and there are certain interest groups <br />that believe that Colorado law allows such an appropriation. <br /> <br />Background <br /> <br />Prior to the enactment of S.B. 97 (CRS ~ 37-92-103(3)) and the Colorado <br />Supreme Court decision of Colorado River Water Conservation District v. <br /> <br />28 <br /> <br />~ <br />