My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
PUB00126
CWCB
>
Publications
>
Backfile
>
PUB00126
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2011 11:14:37 AM
Creation date
9/30/2006 10:21:10 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Publications
Year
2000
Title
Overview of the Rio Grande Compact: Colorado Perspectives
CWCB Section
Interstate & Federal
Description
Overview of the Rio Grande Compact: Colorado Perspectives
Publications - Doc Type
Tech Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
51
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
<br />Media relationship to inform public of significant events <br />Strong relationship between the State Engineer staff and water user community <br /> <br />Current Administration <br /> <br />Since 1968, the Rio Grande Compact has had a significant impact on water rights administration in the <br />Upper Rio Grande in Colorado. The State Engineer has administered the Compact on a two-river system <br />since that time: both the Rio. Grande and the Conejos are administered independently per their respective <br />delivery obligations. Therefore, two separate accountings and administration schemes are used for the <br />day-to-day administration. The following administration process is used for both rivers and is linked only <br />by certain adjustments to the deliveries that are explained later in this document <br /> <br />Article III of the Rio Grande Compact is the pertinent section that determines what administration of <br />water rights is required to provide the appropriate flow to the Stateline to meet Colorado's annual <br />obligation. That article sets the annual delivery obligation for each river based upon the native water that <br />flows past the index stations. The combination of the two separate delivery schedules determines <br />Colorado's total obligation less the 10,000 acre-feet credit provided by the Compact The delivery <br />schedules are reflective of the inflow-outflow relationships developed during the Rio Grande Joint <br />Investigation Study from 1927 to 1936. The delivery schedules set in place the amount of consumptive <br />use that is allowed in each basin for given flows into that basin. The consumptive use that is allowed in <br />each basin is reflected in their delivery schedules by subtracting the delivery obligation from the index <br />flow. For each given annual flow there is a theoretical consumptive use for each river and all additional <br />flows must be passed through the system. The maximum consumptive uses are 570,000 acre-feet on the <br />Rio Grande and 224,000 acre-feet on the Conejos system. These peak consumptive use amounts occur <br />when the annual flow is quite large and considerably above the average flow. The graphs "Rio Grande <br />Compact Delivery Requirements Verses Annual Index Flows" and "Rio Grande Compact Delivery <br />Requirements As Percent of Annual Index Flows" graphically demonstrate the delivery schedules in <br />Article III. They represent both the percentage of the index required as well as the numeric value of the <br />obligation for the corresponding index supply. <br /> <br />Deliveries to the Stateline are not required to strictly adhere to the Compact's delivery schedules on an <br />annual basis. The Compact in Article VI allows for the accrual of Compact credits and debits. Colorado <br />may under deliver by as much as 100,000 acre-feet in anyone year, and may accrue up to 100,000 acre- <br />feet of annual debit over multiple years. Colorado may also receive up to 150,000 acre-feet of annual <br />credit in any. given year and may accrue an unlimited credit over multiple years. This credit and debit <br />accounting provision of the Compact provides Colorado with some flexibility in managing water use <br />from year to year and allows the state to utilize the credit to enhance water supply in years when it will <br />provide relief toa shortage in the system. The only downside to having credit. water stored in Elephant <br />Butte is that approximately 10 percent of the water is lost to evaporation each year. Current <br />administration practices are to make deliveries that approximate the obligation on an annual basis. <br />Because of the vagaries of the climate and hydrology, it is very difficult to forecast accurately enough <br />during the runoff to exactly meet the delivery requirements. <br /> <br />Seasonal Administration <br /> <br />Since 1968, Colorado has attempted several different scenarios to ensure that Colorado would meet her <br />obligation. What has evolved over time is a very successful routine that guides the administrators through <br />the year. It provides a reasonably accurate method for meeting the obligation within a few percentage <br />points, thus allowing Colorado to fully utilize her entitlements and at the same time meet her obligation to <br />the downstream states. It requires recognizing the indexes and deliveries from the first of the year to the <br />present, assuming deliveries for the early winter months and adjusting the forecast for the irrigation <br /> <br />1 ~ <br /> <br />. '" ".. ..~,h~cj <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.