Laserfiche WebLink
<br />C;imsent Agenda Item 2 <br />~eptember 2003 Board Meeting <br />Page 2 of 4 <br /> <br />tpe donated right to TCF. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the CWCB Director to sign the . <br />~ttached agreement <br /> <br />l{iscussion <br /> <br />rhe water right donated to CWCB consists of 16.38 cfs out of a total 20 cfs of the Snowmass Divide <br />1;>itch Enlargement water right (donated right). The Snowmass Divide Ditch diverts water from <br />~nowmass Creek, and irrigates lands in both the Snowmass Creek drainage and the Roaring Fork <br />drainage on the east side of the Watson Divide. The donated right was used on 20 acres of land in the <br />~nowmass Creek drainage, and an additional 220 acres in the Roaring Fork basin. Spronk performed a <br />~tream depletion analysis for the donated water right, based on a historical study period of 1950 through <br />1996. The net average annual stream depletion for the donated right was estimated to be 28 acre-feet. <br />This number is relatively low as compared to average annual diversions of 1160 acre-feet, because the <br />~enior 6.2 cfs Snowmass Divide Ditch water right, which'remains on the land, is generally sufficient to <br />Ip.eet the consumptive crop water demands on the ranch. <br /> <br />1;>ue to the geography and layout of the irrigation system, the historical exercise of the donated water <br />right resulted in a large stream depletion to Snowmass Creek, because a majority of the diversions were <br />(lxported across Watson Divide to the adjacent Roaring Fork Basin. The stream depletion to Snowmass <br />~reek averaged 985 acre-feet per year, which occurred, during the diversion season, generally May <br />through September. Return flows accrued to Snowmass Creek from Ditch seepage and irrigation, which <br />qontributed to flows in October through December. The importation of water to over the divide to the <br />Roaring Fork Basin created a significant accretion to the Roaring Fork in the form of irrigation return . <br />f,lows. This accretion averaged 958 acre-feet per year, and occurred year round. At the confluence of <br />~nowmass Creek and the Roaring Fork River, the average historical depletion to Snowmass Creek of 985 <br />~cre-feet is mostly cancelled out by the average historical accretion to the Roaring Fork of 958 acre-feet, <br />Ipaving a net depletion of 28 acre-feet. <br /> <br />Ip. summary, the exercise of the donated right depleted Snowmass Creek streamflows during the <br />irrigation season but provided some benefit to those flows ,in the fall and early winter months from return <br />f1ows. The exercise of the donated right benefited the Roaring Fork River flows downstream to the <br />Qonfluence of Snowmass Creek on a year round basis, due to delayed irrigation return flows. <br />the CWCB holds instream water rights on Snowmass Creek and the Roaring Fork. Roaring Fork River <br />ipstream flow rights in the affected reach are 55 cfs from April through September, and 30 cfs from <br />q>ctober through March. Snowmass Creek instream flows, total 15 cfs from April 1 through October 15, <br />~d 12 cfs for the remainder of the year for the affected reilch downstream to the confluence with Capitol <br />~reek. Instream flow rights below Capitol Creek downsj:ream to the Roaring Fork River are 22.5 cfs <br />ftom April 1 through October 15 and 11 cfs for the remainder of the year. <br /> <br />~pronk performed an analysis of historical streamflows in the Roaring Fork River and Snowmass Creek <br />tp assess the frequency of times when the CWCB's instream flow rights are likely to not be satisfied. <br />~oaring Fork flows were evaluated based on gage flows at the USGS gage designated as "below Maroon <br />q;reek". The period ofrecord for this gage was 1914 through 1918 and 1991 through 1999. Over this <br />period there were no shortages to the instream flow right. ' <br /> <br />I!'or Snowmass Creek, due to the absence of historical gaged flow records, it was necessary to estimate <br />~ows based on hydrological modeling techniques. Spronk used gaged daily flows from Maroon Creek as <br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Financing. Stream and Lake Protection <br />Water .Supply Protection. Conservation Planning <br /> <br />. <br />