BOARD01451

• Board Meeting Date: 9/13/2004
• Description: ISF Section - Paul Moltz, Case No. 2-02CW073 - Consideration of Inundation Proposal or, in the Alternative, a Request for Authorization to Proceed to Trial
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

Colorado Water
Conservation Board
September 7, 2004
Page 2

.

for the inundation. Instead, Mr. Moltz wishes to assure the Board that he was unaware of the fact
that the CWCB had an instream flow right which extended onto his property, and that he was
entirely unaware that the construction and operation of a dam on Trout Creek would cause the
inundation of a portion of that water right.

In May 2002, Mr. Moltz filed an application in Case No. 02CW73. Water Division 2, for two
conditional water rights and a plan for augmentation for Trout Creek Reservoir. The first
oonditional water right claims a 671.69 acre foot appropriation with an April 20, 2000 appropriation
date. The second conditional water right claims a 485.09 acre foot appropriation with a May 31,
2002 appropriation date. Mr. Moltz claimed all beneficial uses for both oonditional \'later rights, but
has subsequently indicated that he willUmlt claimed beneficial uses for the oonditional \'later rights
to domestic, irrigation, fish propagation and recreational uses, and augmentation of those uses.
The reservoir behind Trout Creek Dam is currently capable of holding the first conditional \'later
right, 671.69 acre feel The dam was designed so that it could be raised and additional 15 feet to
capture the additional 485.09 acre foot appropriation, but that work has not been done.

Because the 2000 appropriation has not been in priority since oompletion of the dam, and
may not be In priority for a number of years, Mr. Moltz filled the reservoir in 2001 pursuant to a
substitute water supply plan which was approved by the State Engineer. Mr. Moltz filled the
reservoir with water native to Trout Creek, but agreed to augment Arkansas River depletions
caused by the initial fill and by ongoing evaporation. which is approximately 52 acre feet annually.
The water court application oontalns an augmentation oomponent which is designed to replace
stream depletions cased by the initial fill and ongOing evaporation to the Arkansas River.

.

In the interest of fully disclosing all the relevant facts, one of the reasons for constructing
the reservoir was to provide hydraulic head for irrigation of several center pivot sprinlders using Mr.
Moltz's 1862 Trout Creek Ditch water right, which is decreed 3.2 cfs for irrigation, with a duty of
water of one cfs for every 50 acres. After oompletion of the dam. Mr. Moltz began diverting water
out of Trout Creek Reservoir and running it through a pipeline to two center pivot sprinklers and
sometimes a third sprinkler. This practice has been very controversial, and Mr. Moltz is now
engaged in settlement negotiations which may result in allowin the oontinued diversion of Trout
Creek Ditch water from the dam only if Mr. Moltz files a separate application to oorrect the decreed
point of diversion for that structure. The decreed point of diversion is .near the center of Section.
26". The actual center of Section 26 is on a rocky rldge several hundred feet from its nearest
location to Trout Creek. In regard to those negotiations. they are still very preliminary and may not
result in a settlement.

.

13990hlmoltzlcweb 09-01-04