My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01648
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01648
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:04:54 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:59:50 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/20/2004
Description
CWCB Director's Report
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
113
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />construction funds to assist with an update and enhancement ofirrigated acreage mapping along the <br />Arkansas mainstem. <br /> <br />Besides meeting modeling needs for Compact compliance determinations, this effort will provide a <br />basis for future Decision Support System implementation in the basin. Weare also using the <br />construction fund to cooperate with the USGS on a study of groundwater pumping measurement <br />methods (see the attached non-reimbursable memo). <br /> <br />With respect to the litigation account funds we have done the following in conjunction with DWR: <br /> <br />1. Entered into an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with Colorado State University (CSU) in an <br />amount of $323,000 for three years of irrigation monitoring and weather station enhancements. <br /> <br />2. Begun processing Purchase Orders to retain engineering consultants to review modifications to <br />the HI Model and serve as expert witnesses in the next phase of the case in an amount of $ 100,000. <br /> <br />3. Begun developing a plan to have CSU bnild two Iysimeters at its Rocky Ford Research Farm. <br />Preliminary drawings have been prepared by our consultant at Texas A&M University who has <br />previously designed similar lysimeters at Bushland, TX, and will be reviewed by peer review team <br />convened by DWR and CSU. We are awaiting design revisions as a result of completion of that <br />review, and preparation offirm cost estimates to begin negotiating a funding agreement with CSU <br />covering installation and operation of the lysimeters. Hopefully, a final construction plan will be in <br />place by early fall, and the project will be operational at the start of the 2005 growing season. <br /> <br />Staffwill be closely monitoring progress and costs on these projects and will provide the Board with <br />periodic updates in the Director's Report. At Board members request more detailed information can be <br />presented under the regular agenda. <br /> <br />Arkansas Valley Conduit: In June, the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works <br />voted to include an amendment to a water infrastructure bill introduced by Sen. Wayne Allard that <br />authorizes the expenditure of$85 million for creation of the Arkansas Valley Conduit Project, which <br />would provide funding for fiscal years 2005 through 2010. Sen. Allard believes he can secure <br />authorization for additional federal funding in other 2004 legislation. <br /> <br />Arkansas River Compact Administration: Details for the next meeting of the Operations Committee <br />set for this August are being developed. A tour of the basin for the federal representative, Robin <br />Jennison, as well as Compact Representatives, and state officials is also being proposed for August. <br /> <br />Water Cases Dismissed: On July 2 the District Court for Water Division No.2 Issued an order <br />dismissing the three Fort Lyons Canal Cases in their entirety. <br /> <br />This Board, the State and Division Engineers, and the Division of Wildlife were all parties to these <br />cases. <br /> <br />The Court granted the motion made by the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservation District, <br />seeking application of the anti-speculation to the change of water rights case. The Court held, in part: <br />"An applicant could easily circumvent the anti-speculation doctrine in the initial application by <br />securing a water right...[ and subsequently apply for a change for uses not included in the original <br />resume.] To permit the anti-speculation doctrine to be so easily manipulated... would play havoc with <br />. the adjudication processes that have served the State well. The proposed uses by Applicants are all- <br />inclusive and are such a deviation from the original right that they take on the characteristics of a new <br />water right. That being the case, all owners who might be injuriously affected have a right to be <br /> <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.