BOARD01275

• Board Meeting Date: 9/22/2003
• Description: ISF Section - Request for Approval of Policy Regarding RICDs
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Raft. !.I,vuld be bt.~_a ll~vll more general characteHstics of the stream reach, site,
intended use, and efficient use of the flow. The eWCB recommends that Applicants
follow these guidelines: ~ ' ~..
. The CWCB reco!n'1lends fRICD flow rat'n the range 0 ar xi ately 50 cfs
to 350 cfs for~til),O:t!6>~orient d oatin f~ilities. al CD flow rate
for a specific sitM~iTrvaryi~in t IS ran , dtp~g on . availability and
other factors related to the recreational f:acility.The CWCB suggests'fl.~ I _. L,' ~#<.J
RICD water right should be granted for a~nded use and for a specific flow CU/'-
rat during an intended period of time.~ , I partie' 3t1gg~3tetl ~~
. . . . .' The CWCB suggests that. ICD
flow rate.)i\irn nable if it exceeds th~ 40th percentile flow rate during the
intended tim rod (flow rates can be evaluated or estimated using available
,- streamflow gage data or other acceptable jmeans).
Based on the futile call doctrine, a holder pf an RICD should not be able to call
for the water right if such a call would I'IU' I _LII R'Il~'" flow to provide a
reasonable recreational experience. ',~ ~

,

e

The above-recommended range of flows for a destination-oriented RICD was arrived at
through the following means: . Vt-- cJ;::/o

· A review of existing and planned "pay for", courses~orldwide. At "pay for" e
courses, the boaters are presumably havil')g a reasonable recreational experience
because they are willing to pay for the experience. (See the "Summary of
Hydrologic Requirements in the Appendix). .aile ~..rTY suggesh"d 111.rt this
. . ..,\p~~I"Y:llIIG.,,*ralco "'QI'~ 0'" cuurses In ~~.
~jJ.VJ il:ll"vl.'fs of existing boating courses!lrc-tu;df~&rveys obtained for the Golden
and Gunnison whitewater courses. Those jsurveys determined that a reasonable
recreation experience could be obtained 41t those courses within the range of flow
rates stated above.
. Recommendations and opinions from the ~WCB's RICD expert, who has significant
experience with evaluation and design of boating courses locally and nationwide.
. Evaluations that the high end of the CWeB's recommended flow range (350 cfs) is
at or above the minimum flow rate utiliz"Id for a significant number of recognized
and international quality sites throughout the world (including the internationally
recognized boating course at La Seu d'Urgell, Spain, which operates with flows as
low as 210 cfs. See the appendix for details).

6. Hydraulic Enaineerina Definition of Control ~ ~
A recreational whitewater boating course must includerhydraulic stream features that e
provide "control" of the streamflow as require9 by engineering principles. The hydraulic

","-""BuJIp, >i ~.' f', l:s1:~tf~/*t;;~
. c::LplJ/VI-'f-w%. ~~ ~~~