Laserfiche WebLink
<br />state some objections to this program on these lakes lying within the <br />boundaries of Jackson County. In our written testimony we s~ated that, <br />trying to get water decreed ,on these lakes is somewhat different from <br />what landowners down in the basin have to go through in that type of <br />adj4dication. The program has called for a metes and bounds type ~f, <br />description on these lakes. We feel if this is a necessary procedure, <br />then they should go through the same procedure as the ordinary water <br />user down in the basin. <br /> <br />However, we also ~ee1 that maybe this is probably not really a neces- <br />sary,thing to do to even file on this water,in these lakes. They have <br />been there ever since that canyon washed out. As you can all see, <br />there are high altitude lakes. Some of them are very minimal in <br />capacity, as has been estimated. Now, I think welre concerned here <br />about how they estimated these lakes. I'd like to ,point out, for <br />instance, Lake Elaine has 4 feet of water in it, it says here. How <br />much water are you going to ~i1e on that thing? Irregard1ess, we have <br />a feeling that even in those high altitude lakes where they have a <br />definite outlet into the river basin, they still have some result to <br />the water down in the basin.: We really would rather not see this ki~d <br />of a program started in the high mountain lakes in Jackson County. The <br />only other thing I can say is that this reminds me a little bit of <br />wilderness. You designate a wilderness area and you designate an <br />attractive nuisanc;e. I think you've done the same thing here with <br />these lakes allover Colorado. When people find out that the Fish and <br />Game or the Department of Natural Resources, owns sOme', water up there, <br />they're going to be attractive nuisances, and I think you're all aware <br />of what happens there. So without any further ado, .on behalf of the <br />North Park Soil Conservation District, we would like to,object to this. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Thank you, Don. Any other people like to speak? <br /> <br />MR. MEYRING: I 'have a question. My name is Oliver Meyring. I don't <br />think whoever filed on these thin9s did their homework. ,In my esti- <br />mation, they aren't lakes -- they re beaver dams. You have eliminated <br />two of them that I know of, but my question is -- you didn't do your, <br />homework, or you wouldn't have filed on.a beaver dam. It isn't a lake <br />in my opinion. This Willow Lake is.a beaver dam. You filed on 8 feet <br />of water. Another question I have is in that respect, I see another <br />lake filed on that doesn't exist. It is a beaver dam. 'It has 24 <br />inches of water and how do you know it has 24 inches of water? And if ' <br />you came back at a later date and made a survey on that and you were <br />storing only 16 acre-feet of water, would you have a right to store that <br />additional water up to 24 feet of water? If you do, then you're taking <br />some downstream appropriated water. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: I can respond to that, Mr. Chairman, by first stating that <br />the law says a minimum level. That translates to elevation. Without <br />spending huge sums.of money, there's no way that we can get the exact <br />capacity of any lake. <br /> <br />MR. MEYRING: .Without a survey? <br /> <br />-22- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />