Laserfiche WebLink
limit transmission lines. Some group members have spoken of protecting the <br />"hydrograph ". That means there would not be any diversions, and that's a very <br />big step. The SWCD wonders if a WSR designation is really right if the values <br />can be protected in other ways. <br />Bruce noted that a potential reservoir site on the upper end of Hermosa Creek <br />was identified under the Statewide Water Supply Initiative ( "SWSI "), an 18 -month <br />study of water supply and needs that was launched in 2003. The site came from <br />a study the Bureau of Reclamation had done in conjunction with the Animas -La <br />Plata Project. Whether having a reservoir there is feasible now is uncertain, but <br />will it be needed in 75 years? <br />Steve agreed it is difficult to say that reservoir site, or something else in that <br />area, will never be needed. Trying to undo a WSR designation to allow for such <br />a reservoir would be difficult. He said in Colorado there is a concept that water <br />belongs to the people for beneficial use. The concept of the federal reserved <br />water right was developed long after the state constitution was approved. <br />Meghan and'Chuck then gave their views on the positive aspects of a WSR <br />designation. Meghan said alternative water - rights language could address many <br />of the water - users' concerns. Most of the land mass in the Hermosa Creek Area <br />is federally owned, so there would be fewer conflicts involved with a WSR <br />designation there than in other places. <br />Chuck said he sees no real reason not to support the WSR designation. The <br />right to develop water is already constrained; you can't, for instance, go develop <br />water rights for recreation. He believes it would be possible to craft a right that <br />would be appropriate and reasonable in terms of its size and timing. The water <br />right would of course be low- priority. <br />Chuck said only 14 of the hundreds of WSRs in the country have a quantified <br />water right. He believes protecting the hydrograph doesn't mean saving all the <br />water but preserving the shape of the hydrograph. A WSR designation for <br />Hermosa Creek would mean giving up only one development site that hasn't <br />been thoroughly explored, not giving up the water itself or the right to develop it <br />on some other part of the creek. <br />Chuck said the state has leaned too heavily in the direction of development. <br />Colorado has many outstanding rivers but only one WSR, which seems strange. <br />Recreation and the environment are legitimate uses under Colorado water law. <br />Those uses weren't concerned legitimate in 1941 when the SWCD was formed, <br />but they are now. This basin is an area with a variety of multiple uses and it is <br />worth protecting through some specially crafted language. <br />Bruce said a WSR could affect existing water rights, not just future ones. It could <br />make it difficult to change a water right. Steve said it's important to preserve <br />opportunities for the future. He doesn't feel we have the ability to quantify what <br />will be needed in coming decades. Bruce said SWSI projected water - supply <br />2 <br />