BOARD02151

• Board Meeting Date: 5/19/2003
• Description: CF Section - Springdale Ditch Company
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

,

Sprln9dale DitCh Company
May 19-20, 2003

Agenda Item 16b

The 5prJnadale Ditch Company
The SDC is a Colorado non-profit Ditch Company registered in the State of Colorado. There are .
52 shareholders and 831.5 shares of stock. The SDC has the power to set annual assessments
to be paid by the shareholders and the power to refuse to deliver water to shareholders that fail
to pay their assessments.

Water Rlahts '
The SDC has rights to divert 62.5 cfs from the South Platte River under an 1886 decree, and
diverts on average approximately 7,147 acre-feet of water per year through their ditch.

The 52 shareholders of the SDC also have decrees on 43 wells used for irrigating the 4,490
acres under their system. These wells are currently augmented through GASP. The SDC
diverts on average approximately 3,500 acre-feet of water per year through these 43 wells.

The SDC Is applying for an augmentation water right for this project, which would allow them to
divert up to 4,000 acre-feet per year. This would be used to cover the depletions of the 43 junior
wells, as well as provide additional water to augment other wells outside the Springdale system.

Project Description
Three alternatives were analyzed in the feasibility study:

1) Don't build a project. Continue to rely solely up?n GASP for augmentation.

2) Purchase a senior water right and use it for au~mentation.

3) Construct a series of recharge ponds, one augmentation well, and 2 recharge wells to .
generate the needed augmentation credits.

Alternative 1: "Don't build a project. Continue to rely so/ely upon GASP for augmentation." is
not a feasible alternative. SDC would continue to clepend on GASP for augmentation, and upon
supplies secured by GASP on a one-year lease basis. llf any of these leases are not renewed or
cannot be renewed because of the extreme drought conditions, the SDC could not operate their
wells. This would be an annual loss of approximately 3,500 acre-feet.

Alternative 2: "Purchase a senior water right and use it for augmentation." The SDC could
purchase shares of Prewitt Reservoir water for augmef1tation. Prewitt shares are selling for
$15,000 or approximately $1,000 per acre-foot. This alternative would cost the SDC well over
$1,000,000.

Alternative 3, Construct a series of recharge ponds, Ol')e augmentation well, and 2 recharge
wells to generate the needed augmentation credits, would use the recharge wells to fill the
recharge ponds during the winter months when there is generally not a call on the river. Water
from the ponds would return to the river by underground percolation during the summer time
while the SDC has depletions that need to be offset with augmentation water. The
augmentation well would supply water directly to the river during the most severe drought
situation. The cost of this alternative is $135,000, andiit is the preferred alternative.

.

2