My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Rebuttal Statements of Upper Yamps Conservancy District (no exhibits), Morrison Creek Metropolitan District
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Rebuttal Statements of Upper Yamps Conservancy District (no exhibits), Morrison Creek Metropolitan District
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:42:06 PM
Creation date
8/11/2009 10:41:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.21A2
Description
CWCB Hearing: Objectors' Prehearing Statements
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Author
Margaret O'Donnell, Robert G. Weiss, John Redmond, Mike Newmann, Jason Yanowitz, Chester Thorton
Title
Rebuttal Statements of Upper Yamps Conservancy District (no exhibits), Morrison Creek Metropolitan District
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
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
MAY-18-04 14:20 FROM-WEISS AND VAN SCOYK 970 879 6058 T-286 P.005/033 F-562 <br />impair the ability of the Discricc to develop these resourees by hindering future <br />exchanges, traiasfers, changes in wacer rights, and/or thz development of fiiture <br />storage rights on the 'Y'ampa River upstream of the Steamboat Springs Boating <br />Parlc ("Boating Parlc"), the location of "C Hole" and "D Hole", or Sn-ueture Nos. 1 <br />and 2("Scruetures"). Over the past several years, the District has been <br />researching several potential small reservoir sites in an e.ffort to develop operating <br />stracegies that best meet the long term water supply and econoinic needs of the <br />area. The ability to secure reliable sources o!'water for these sites will be grzatly <br />impacted if the City's RICD is granted since junior diversian riglzts for municipal <br />purposes will be subject to call as much as lialf the time during late si-ursmer and <br />fall. Without a firm yield, the District's ability to oUtaiii financing will bz <br />detrimentally impacted. <br />3. The WCD approprictcion is not far an appropriate reuch of the strearrc. <br />The District suppores the C'WCB finding that the reach of the stream is <br />inappropriate due to the Structt?res' eFFect on elevating the water sur!'acc, thus <br />exacerbating flood events. ThE District's own review of the flood plain impacts <br />support che findings of the CWCB repon to this effecl. <br />4. Tubing is not an activity clependent on rhe dtversion, conrrol and captrire elernents <br />required by the RICD. The Str-ttctures hu>>e no real ef'fect wirh respect ro the <br />recreational tise reqzcested for Tztbiizg and any amounts regaiested for this use <br />must be clenied <br />Sincc Sl'ruCL'uTeS Nos. 1 and 2 are superfluous and irrclevant to the tubing <br />experience, they do not constitute appropriate diversions for this panicular <br />recreational use. Morcover, tubing becomes a dangerous activity wit11 respect to <br />the play waves created by the Structures. Several instances have occurred where <br />tubers have had co be rescued at the "C" Hole. Consequently, the uses of tubing <br />and kayalGixag are at odds with each other since the struccures req«ired for one <br />recreational use, kayaking, work to deuact and even present a risJc to participarits <br />of the otlzer activity, i.e., tubing. Tlaerefore, Tubing should not be considered as <br />one of the beneficial uses, as applied for by tlZC Applicant. <br />5. fhe amozenc of waaer soarghr for the RICD is not the mininz-ttm amorint necessary <br />ro provide a reasonable recreationul experieyace and the tivater right shoiild only <br />be available when zhere is signifccQnt, actual beneficial use. <br />Observations conducced by the DistricL s11ow maity days of non-use for kayaking <br />and no days of use For the other req«ested uses of tuUing, rafting, canoeing, etc. <br />The appropriation must only be available to the City when there are actual <br />boaters, for all uses. Otherwise, the City's call is fittile. <br />-2-
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.