BOARD00656 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Orphans i,\le-:I~; of Wiggins LLC November 19-.21 ,2003 N;enC3 item 8f The Orphans Wells of Wiqqins LLC The OWW is a Colorado non~profit Ditch Company registered 'n t~le State of Colorado. There are 31 shareholders. The OV'Nv has the power to set annual assessments to be pwd by Hie sharehoiders and the power to retain augmentation credits from shareholders that fail to pay the,r assessments. Water RiQhts The OllvW has applied for well permits for both its recharge and augmentation wens. These welis 'Wiil pump water to cover depletions of approximately 4,000 acre~feet per year, The augmentation well wili have a capacity of 3,000 gpm (6.? cfs), and the recharge well '.viii have a capacity of 2,000 gprn to 4000 gpm (4.5 cfs to 9 cfs) depending on the thickness of the alluvium at the well site. l"lthough these welis wit; have the capability to divert (pump) up to 5,000 acre.. feet each per year, actual diversions wiil vary depending upon cails on the river. The 31 sharelolders of t~le OWW have decrees on their 45 weils used for irrigating 4,500 acres. These wells have been augmented through GASP in prior years. The OVVVV shareholders divert on average approximately 6.000 acre-feet of water per year Hlrough these 45 wells. .froiect Description Three alternalives were analyzed in the feasibility study: 1) Don't bu,ld the project Continue to rely soie1y upon GASP for augmentation, 2) PurOlase a senior water rigilt and use it for augmentation. 3) Construct one recharge well, one augmentation weli, a pipeline, and 23 recharge ponds to generate the needed augmentation credits. Alternative 1: "Don't fJuild the project. Continue to rely solely upon GASP for augmentation. c, is not a feasible ailernatlve. OWW would continue to depend on GASP for augmentaUon, and upon suppiies secured by GASP on a one..yea;' lease basis. If any of these leases are not renewed or cannot be renewed, shareholders of the OWW could not operate their wells, This would be an annual loss of approximately 6.000 acre~feet. Alternative 2: "Purchase a .senior water right and use it for augmentation." The OWW could purchase st13r8S of Jackson Reservoir or Riverside Reservoir for augmentation, Reservoir shares are sellin!J for $20,000 or approximately $1.000 per acre. fool. HI'S alternative would cost the OWW about $4 million Alternative 3, Con.struct 1 recharge welf, 1 augmentation we!l, a pipeline, and 23 rE>c!wrg6> pond.s to generate rhe needed augmentation credits, would use the recharge well and existing ditch systems to lillthe recharge ponds during the winter months when there is generally nat a cail on tile river. Water from the ponds would return to the river oy underground percolation durine the summer time while the OWW has depietions that need to be offset with augn{entation water. \/Valer could also be return'ed to the river more quickly by pUlTlPing the augmentation well to the pipeline during the most severe drought situation. nle cost of this alternative is $, .153 rnill,on, and it 's tile preferred alternative.