Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"I . "~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Colorado Water <br />ConselVation Board <br />September 7, 2004 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />REQUIRED INFORMATION PURSUANT TO RULE 7e. <br /> <br />1. Location and size of inundation. The Trout Creek Dam is located in the NW1/4 of <br />Section 25, T,14S., R. 78 Woo 61h P.M. The dam crest station 1+00 is located at a point from which <br />the NVV comer of Section 26 bears N. 21 degrees 55 minutes 35 seconds west a distance of <br />1,633.95 feet. The reservoir covers 26.53 acres at its current capacity. but the area of inundation <br />of Trout Creek is far less. The linear feet of inundation at the reservoir's current size is <br />approximately 3,000 feet. If the dam is raised an additional 15 feet, an additional1,500:t feet of <br />stream would be inundated. <br /> <br />2. Impact of inundation. Jay Skinner of the Division of Wildlife has, in the course of <br />the water court litigation, indicated that inundation has negatively impacted (a) natural riparian <br />wetlands: (b) potential brook trout spawning habitat, (c) possible boreal toad habitat; and (d) <br />resulted in the Joss of approximately 0.8 miles of streamllbeaver pond complexes. Mr. Moltz does <br />not know whether the inundated area was habitat for boreal toads, but does not dispute Mr. <br />Skinner's other findings, except perhaps for the length of stream which was inundated. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />3. Unique or rare characteristics of the inundation. The area inundated was <br />approximately 3,000 feet (Mr. Skinner's estimate of 0.8 miles appears to be somewhat high) of a <br />much larger instream flow reach appropriated by the CWCB on Trout Creek. There does not <br />appear to be anything about the 3,000 foot stretch which was inundated which appears to be <br />significantly different from the remainder of the upstream portion of the instream flow reach. <br /> <br />4. Regulatory requirements or conditions imposed by federal. state and/or local <br />governments. The dam and reservoir were exempted from 404 permit requirements by the U.S <br />Army Corps of Engineers based on the agricultural aspect of the dam and reservoir - i.e., providing <br />hydraulic head for center pivot sprinklers. Nor were any other federal requirements imposed upon <br />the project. The State of Colorado's requirements regarding dam design were all complied with. <br />Chaffee County did not impose any restrictions or requirements on the project of which I am aware, <br />except that if the reservoir is expanded. a county road will have to be re-routed, which will be, at <br />least in part, the obligation of the applicant. <br /> <br />5. All terms and conditions included in applicant's water court decree.. This is still in <br />a state of flux, as referenced above. At a bare minimum, Mr. Moltz will have to replace to the <br />Arkansas River the lagged stream depletions caused by the initial filling of the reservoir, ongoing <br />reservoir evaporation, and any additional depletions caused by partially draining and then refilling <br />the reservoir. Mr. Moltz is seeking to replace the depletions directly to the Arkansas River from fully <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />13990hlmollZ'lewcb 09-07-04 <br />