Laserfiche WebLink
<br />l <br /> <br />- 4 - <br /> <br />year period 1938-1948. An examination of the direct flow water rights in this <br /> <br /> <br />reach shows that decreed rights with priority dates prior to 1881 total over <br /> <br /> <br />300 second feet. Stream flows must be adequate to satisfy these rights before <br /> <br /> <br />the more junior rights, which in the aggregate are almost equal in amount, become <br /> <br /> <br />operative. The result has been that the ditches which have ,junior rights, al- <br /> <br /> <br />though their diversion works may be seriously damaged by major floods, are able <br /> <br /> <br />to make diversions only at times of flood flows of generally lesser magnitude. <br /> <br /> <br />It would appear t~at the installation of recommended measures (a), (b), <br /> <br /> <br />(c) and especially (f), as listed above, might have a material effect in reducing <br /> <br /> <br />the diversion yield:;; o! such junior rights. No evaluation of the effects of the <br /> <br /> <br />proposed measures upon existing water rights has been made in the report, nor <br /> <br /> <br />are the locations of the proposed dikes, terraces, water spreading structures <br /> <br /> <br />and detention dams shown with respect to existing headgates for direct flow di- <br /> <br /> <br />versions or for those feeding off-channel storage reservoirs on either the main <br /> <br /> <br />stream or tributaries. Since such data are essential in making estimates of <br /> <br /> <br />changes in stream flow regimen due to these measures, it is not possible for <br /> <br /> <br />Colorado to make an independent evaluation of this phase of project effects. <br /> <br /> <br />Another major consideration in connection with any proposed project is <br /> <br /> <br />the effect which the construction of such a project development might have with <br /> <br /> <br />respect to interstate agreements or compacts which have been made between the <br /> <br /> <br />State of Colorado and adj oining States. Paragraph D of Article IV of the Arkan- <br /> <br /> <br />sas River Compact between Colorado and Kansas, which has been in e!fect since <br /> <br /> <br />May 31, 1949, states: <br /> <br /> <br />"This Compact is not intended to impede or prevent future <br /> <br /> <br />beneficial development of the Arkansas River Basin in Colorado and <br /> <br /> <br />Kansas by Federal or State agencies, by private enterprise, or by <br />