Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Surface Creek service area before allowing any "first use" of releases in the lower <br />basin. Return flows under this policy would, however, be used to a considerable <br />extent in the lower basin. Under this reservoir operation policy, approximately <br />4,300 acre-feet of return flows could be used each year, on the average, instead of <br />being discharged unused into Gunnison River. <br /> <br />The consultant found that implementation of this plan is not a viable option. It <br />would clearly infringe upon existing water rights. The burden of the average <br />annual water shortage would be shifted to the lower basin service area, contrary to <br />the ranking of storage rights. Holders of such rights would clearly not relinquish <br />their rights. Provided, however, that present holders of storage rights were <br />offered water from another source, such as fro'l1 a new reservoir at Cactus Park, <br />implementing changes in where releases from the headwaters reservoirs are used <br />could possibly become one component of a viable plan. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Although the first approach (reduced diversions) could make more water available, <br />it would not increase the supply available to any significant number of irrigators. <br />The second approach (using existing reservoir water higher in the basin) could <br />improve the water availability, but would not be a viable plan because of the <br />unacceptable effect of infringing on recognized water rights. Both of these <br />measures, however, could be incorporated as one component of a more comprehen- <br />sive plan with overall viability. <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />B. System Improvements <br /> <br />Since non-structural measures alone cannot provide a viable means of alleviating <br />water shortages, it is evident that more storage capacity is needed. Before <br />evaluating sites for new reservoirs, the consultant examined the possibility of <br />enlarging the storage capacity at existing headwaters reservoirs. Nine principal <br />reservoirs, the most likely impoundments for possible enlargement, were <br />selectedJ/ <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />1/ Island Lake, Deep Slough, Deep Ward Lake, Donnely, Carbonate Camp No.6, <br />Carbonate Camp No.7, Park, Bonita, and Cedar Mesa Reservoirs. <br /> <br />IV-7 <br />