Laserfiche WebLink
exercising or could exercise a call may reduce the effect of the proposed RICD water <br /> right on junior priorities within the Gunnison Basin, such agreements would not benefit <br /> any junior upstream transmountain diversion project, particularly if the transmountain <br /> diversion relied on an exchange of water from Blue Mesa Reservoir. Furthermore, <br /> allowing certain inbasin juniors to benefit from existing subordination agreements that <br /> the UGRWCD has made may raise selective subordination issues and may not be <br /> administerable by the Division Engineer. <br /> Our analysis of water availability and the report of James E. Slattery of Helton & <br /> Williamsen, P.C., July 17, 2002, describes water availability and the degree of impact to <br /> junior upstream water rights and exchanges. The proposed RICD would seek to control <br /> 236,363 acre feet of the 389,175 acre feet available on average between May 1 and <br /> September 30, or approximately 61 % of the flow on average. Thus, there appears to be <br /> some water available on. average to new uses above the whitewater course. However, in <br /> order to evaluate how much is actually available to new juniors, we are running our <br /> CRDSS model for the Gunnison Basin to better answer this question. We will update our <br /> opinion when the results of that analysis are complete. We would observe that in very <br /> dry years, even after construction of Blue Mesa Reservoir, upstream junior water rights <br /> are subject to the calls of the Gunnison Tunnel and Redlands Power Canal water rights <br /> during April and in August and September as happened in 1977 and 2002. During these <br /> very dry periods, in basin upstream junior water rights and exchanges may benefit from <br /> the UGRWCD's agreement not to exercise a call. However, I believe that in some years, <br /> the claimed water right could affect junior upstream water rights in the Gunnison River <br /> Basin, or the operation of some junior exchanges. <br /> 4.3 Colorado's Compact Entitlement <br /> The claimed water right and the whitewater course are located in the Gunnison <br /> River, which is a tributary of the Colorado River. Colorado's right to consumptively use - <br /> water is limited by compacts, statutes, a United States Supreme Court Decree, and a <br /> Treaty with Mexico, which are collectively known as the "Law of the River." As you <br /> would hope, Mr. Lochhead and I agree on the key elements of the "Law of the River" <br /> that impose the most direct limitations on the use of water in Colorado. Rather than <br /> reiterate that discussion, I prefer to .attach the summary from the publication by the U.S. <br /> Bureau of Reclamation tined, "Updating the Hoover Dam Documents" (Attachment. <br /> C). This provides a very nice overview of the "Law of the River." The critical <br /> Compact concerns with respect to the RICD are: (1) how much is Colorado entitled to <br /> use under the Compacts; (2) where and how much is Colorado currently using; and (3) <br /> where and how are future uses in Colorado most likely to occur. The issue of whether <br /> or not adequate water is going downstream to meet the obligation of the Upper Basin to <br /> the Lower Basin is secondary and addressed in part through the "Hydrologic <br /> Determination" process and in part through the operation of Glen Canyon Dam. Glen <br /> Canyon Dam and Lake Powell, authorized by the 1956 Colorado River Storage Project <br /> Act to regulate and store waters of the Colorado River System, provides the primary <br /> storage that helps assure that the flows at Lee Ferry are not reduced below .an aggregate <br /> of 75 million acre -feet (maf) during any consecutive 10 -year period. By regulating <br /> 7of17 <br />