Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />1eng and impassioned plea that I was geing to. make, and then Ben went <br />back to. Denver. I think I have the same apprehensiens I had befere. <br />I henestly believe in the cencept that every stream in Co1erado must <br />net be dried up, that they de have aesthetic and ether values besides <br />domestic and agricultural uses. They came to. eur area, a date was set <br />to. meet with them, but the date was changed which became a little <br />difficult for me. Some changes, rather sizable changes, have been made, <br />but I would have to ask the same question, I think, that Jehn Brewnell <br />did. That is that they have taken en the La Plata River and all the <br />little tributaries er they have taken five of the tributaries ef the <br />La Plata, but they've left eff feur. And, Eddie, yeu say you could do <br />this as an educated guess or something. I think you've dene all this <br />as an educated guess, and I weu1d prepese that you bring the ether feur <br />in too, en the same kind of educated guess. <br /> <br />One further comment that I would make. Yeu did TIleve the Junctien Creek <br />beundary back to the National Forest line. It's set up for fifteen feet <br />ef minimum flow. I checked with a few peeple the day befere yesterday <br />and it prebably is flewing tnree'reet at this time befere any diversiens, <br />and this. is typical. In many places it's totally dry. I think the <br />amount is an unrealistic high, and I have no. other quarrel with that one. <br /> <br />On Lightner Creek, I would like to suggest that you meve that back to <br />the Forest Service boundaries because, here again, Yeu have ten second <br />feet in the summer time and feur secend feet in the winter time, and I <br />leeked at the gaging statien records and it drops dewn to ene secend <br />foot most winters. This toe, is an area similar to. Junction Creek. I <br />weuld like to see that meved back to. the Ferest Service beundary. <br /> <br />I guess the thing that disturbs me mest of all is a year age we filed <br />witheut any objection on the Navajo, the Little Navajo. and the Rio. <br />Blanco. fer IIlinimum stream flows. We have a prierity at this time en <br />these minimum stream flows, and it has net been administered. We are <br />not calling fer releases so they can be met. <br /> <br />So, I think that's my stery, and I don't believe 1'm geing to make any <br />motions in regard to. it, just emetiens. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: You put us in a difficult spot, Mr. Chairman. I under- <br />stand the extent ef yeur objectien. We reviewed them thereugh1y and we <br />made some changes. We feel that what we have here is as far as we can <br />go. in trying to. recenci1e the preb1em. As far as the staff is cencerned, <br />we cannot recommend any further changes. <br /> <br />MR. BENTON: I just have one question, Mr. Chairman. You mentioned one <br />of them that wasn't being administered. Are there some rights junior to <br />this 1975 decree that are now drawing water eut of the creek? <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: I think there are, 'yes. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: The administration is under the effice ef the State Engineer. <br />This dees pese a censiderable additonal burden upon the State Engineer <br />and his staff. We have a remedy to. go. to. court en diversiens which <br /> <br />-45- <br />