My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00285
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00285
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:48:14 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:34:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/18/2005
Description
ISF Section - Contested Instream Flow Appropriations Request to Table Until 2006
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
38
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 />Flow is generally available for future development in the high-runoff months of April, <br />May, and June. Future development of these flows will require storage for either a year- <br />round supply or full irrigation season supply. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br /> <br />As shown in the figures, the physically available flow is generally sufficient to meet the <br />instream flows requested by the CWCB. Because in stream flows are non-consumptive, <br />their use would not be called out by downstream senior water rights. The results indicate <br />that in general, future development in the North Fork and Smith Fork basins will be <br />restricted by downstream calling rights except during runoff periods, and not by the <br />instream flow filings. During runoff periods, available flow for development is in excess <br />of the instream flow request except in extremely dry years. <br /> <br />Comments and Concerns <br /> <br />There are several decreed and non-decreed agricultural exchanges that allow water to be <br />diverted out-of-priority upstream of Paonia and Crawford Reservoirs in exchange for <br />releases from those reservoirs. These exchanges are accounted for in the model results <br />presented in this memorandum and in the in stream flow requests. If future development <br />requires these exchanges for a different use, for instance for municipal use instead of <br />agricultural use, the instream flow requests may limit the exchanges. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.