Laserfiche WebLink
<br />t <br /> <br />has indicated that pursuant to the Colorado Constitution until new appointments are made Jim and <br />Tom continue to represent Colorado on the Administration. Jim has served for 20 years and Tom <br />for 8, both men have done an outstanding job of representing the interests of basin water users <br />and the State of Colorado during the difficult period of the Kansas v. Colorado litigation. <br /> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Kansas v. Colorado <br />· Update: Both the Attorney General and the State Engineer may report on this item in more detail. <br />In general there has been significant progress in resolving numerous technical issues related to <br />modeling and future Compact compliance. The Colorado State Engineer and the Kansas Chief <br />Engineer have entered into a seies of agreements regarding water accounting and representing <br />actual operations in the HI Model. At least one issue regarding the Graham Ditch has been <br />referred to binding arbitration, which is scheduled for Nov. 17-18. The States have agreed on the <br />procedures to be used and selected Roger Patterson of Omaha, Nebraska to conduct the <br />arbitration. The Special Master continues to hold the States to an aggressive schedule for <br />resolving all outstanding issues and entry of II final judgment. <br />· Litigation Account Sununary. Work continues on the second year of irrigation study with CSU <br />and a data review and planning session for the third year will be held early in 2006. The <br />CoAgMet weatherstation upgrades and enhancements have been completed and a full irrigation <br />season worth of data has been collected. This data will be utilized in determining crop <br />consumptive use during the next compliance period. Work on the first lysimeter continues, with <br />shipment of fabricated parts to Rocky Ford for installlltion imminent and plans to begin <br />conducting crop experiments during the 2006 growing season being developed. It is not yet clear <br />if there Will be sufficient funds to construct a second Iysimeter at Rocky Ford. Funding sources <br />for long-term operation of the Iysimeter by CSU have not yet been secured, although some <br />discussion with the USDA Agricultural Research Service ["ARS'1 and Congressional staffers has <br />occurred. <br /> <br />Trinidad Reservoir Operating PrInciples to-year Review: The Trinidad Project is a flood control and <br />water conservation project on the Purgatoire River in Las Animas County, Colorado. It was initiated in <br />the 1950's subsequent to adoption of the Arkansas River Compact and therefore must not cause material <br />depletions to useable Stateline flows as compared to the pre-project condition. In the 1960's modeling <br />studies were done and Operating Principles created to assure that irrigation of project lands with newly <br />stored water did not enlarge historical consumptive use. To obtain federal funding it was also necessary <br />to have the project approved by the Arkansas River Compact Administration and the State of Kansas, <br />which approval was received in 1967. The project was built by the US Anny Corps of Engineers, but the <br />irrigation component is delegated to the US Bureau of Reclamation, and repayment for those features is <br />pursuant to a contract with the Purgatoire River Water Conservancy District ["PRWCD'1. The project <br />was essentially completed in 1977 and after some additional legal questions were resolved began <br />operating in 1979. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />As a condition of its approval ofthe project the State of Kansas required that project operations be <br />reviewed after the first 5 years of operation, and every ten years thereafter. Pursuant to the Operating <br />Principles the purpose of the review is twofold: "obtaining optimum beneficial use of water as conditions <br />change... (and) ... to detennine the effect, if any, the operation has had on other Colorado and Kansas <br />water users ..... Operational reviews of the periods 1979-1984 and 1985-1994 have been completed and <br />concluded that project operation has had no material impact on other water users. Several changes have <br />been made to the Operating Principles as a result of these reviews to address an enlarged fishery pool, <br />improve stock watering releases, better track irrigated acres, and reconcile differences between planned <br />and actual project development. On Oct. 5 USBR held an initial scoping meeting in Trinidad to <br />commence the third review which will cover the period 1995-2004. Kansas has asked for a full review of <br />actual project operations during this period with an emphasis on more recent changes, flood control <br /> <br />15 <br />