7884

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7884
• Author: Hydrosphere Resource Consultants.
• Title: Reconnaissance Evaluation of Yampa River Diversion Structures.
• USFW Year: 1995.
• USFW - Doc Type: Boulder, CO.
• Copyright Material: NO

1
1

1

1

Chapter 2
Inventory and Field Reconnaissance
INITIAL INVENTORY
The initial listing of structures diverting from the Yampa River mainstem in the reach of
interest was obtained from the Division 6 office of the State Engineer. Division 6 encompasses
all of the Green, Yampa, White, and North Platte river basins in Colorado and is divided into 8
administrative sub-units or Water Districts. The reach of interest is entirely contained within
Water Districts 44, 55, and 57.
The Division 6 diversion records database was consulted for a listing of mainstem
diversions in these three Districts. A total of 119 diversions were found---87 in District 44, 4
in District 55, and 29 in District 57. Since it was beyond the scope of the present study to
examine all 119 of these structures, a screening process was used to reduce it to a manageable
number. The entire list of 119 structures is contained in Appendix C.
The general objective of the screening process was to weed out diversion structures that
were less likely to be problematical. The screening criteria used were as follows:
1) Exclude all diversions outside the reach of interest.
2) Exclude all structures showing no historical diversions since; 1980.
3) Exclude all structures known to be inactive by water administration officials.
4) Exclude all diversions known to have no instream structural components.
5) Exclude all structures decreed to divert less than 10 cfs.
After application of these criteria, the list was reviewed and discussed with local water
administration officials and other knowledgeable persons. Based on these interviews certain
structures were added back onto the list. Structures were also added back onto the list if they
were shown on the videotape prepared by the City of Craig as a preliminary reconnaissance in
cooperation with the Division 6 Water Commissioners or if they were otherwise believed to
present a potential problem. The resulting list totaled 31 structures. This list is reproduced in
Table 2-1.
The 31 structures were then located on a series of 7.5' USGS maps covering the reach of
interest. This series of maps is contained in Appendix D (note that the maps in this appendix
' reflect subsequent reconnaissance activities and thus show more than 31 structures). An
overview map showing the approximate locations of the 31 structures is provided in
Figure 2-1.

1 2-1