Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />RECEIVED <br />THE PISGAH R.ESER.VOIR. AND DITCH COMPANY ill f) V 1 2 1998 <br /> <br />===========================================================~mr.~==== <br />917 Elm Ave., P.O. Box 352, Rocky Fol:ocr:r'~e~67 <br /> <br />November 12, 1998 <br /> <br />Minimum stream Flow Section <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />Attention: Dan and Mark <br /> <br />Gentlemen: <br /> <br />Thank you for explaning that the Colorado Water Conservation <br />Board will consider minimum stream flow for a segment of Four <br />Mile Creek based upon the request of Bureau of Land Management <br />for a minimum stream flow of 13 cfs. Staff of Colorado Water <br />Conservation Board determined that a flow of 13 cfs was not <br />available for either the en~~e segment of the stream or the <br />entire year. . . <br /> <br />The determination led to the subject stream flow segment being <br />divided into four reaches. An estimate of available water supply <br />was then determined for each reach by (1) using rain gauges <br />outside the four corners of the drainage area, (2) determining an <br />average rainfall, and (3) applying the average rainfall to <br />drainage area for each reach. The estimated available water <br />supply was then correlated with the stream flow record below the <br />confluence of Cripple Creek and diversion records of the ditches <br />within each reach for a five year period commencing in 1992. <br />Staff then recommended that the entire available total average <br />flow be claimed as minimum flow. <br /> <br />Your claim for a minimum flow of 13cfs above Park Center Ditch <br />was based upon the fact that the ditches were diverting 13 cfs. <br />Just because flow is available to supply downstream diversions, <br />it does not necessarily stand to reason that all of that flow <br />should be categorized as minimum stream flow. Your claim should <br />be for water necessary to supply the beneficial use of minimum <br />flow, not the total supply available for diversion. Even when <br />excess water is available, the Water Court has a record of limit- <br />ing decreed priorities to the amount of water reasonably <br />necessary for the stated beneficial use. <br />