Laserfiche WebLink
Figure 8 <br />Typical Undepleted <br />Maybell Hydrograph <br />(Average Year) <br />Possible <br />ISF Filing <br />�i Q m ' 7 m o m <br />U) z 0 <br />8,000 <br />7, 000 <br />8,000 <br />5,000 <br />LL <br />N <br />0 <br />U <br />3 4,000 <br />0 <br />LL <br />3,000 <br />2,000 <br />1,000 <br />0 <br />Option lb - Development Allowance Excluded from Filing <br />Concept: This option most resembles a traditional CWCB instream flow filing. The <br />future development reservation would be subtracted from presently available flow to <br />define seasonal values of an instream flow decree. Administration of the decree would <br />be accomplished by monitoring flows at Maybell (or other points on the river) and <br />placing a call against upstream rights junior to 1995 when flows dropped below the <br />decree level. <br />Advantages: <br />• familiarity - -- most like traditional CWCB filing <br />• administration based on observable flow conditions <br />• potential effects on juniors can be assessed as with any other water right <br />Disadvantages: <br />• does not explicitly preserve variability, especially from year to year <br />• not entirely consistent with terms of Enforcement Agreement <br />• concerns that "constant" or "stair - stepped" flows would result <br />