Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ <br />~ <br />I <br />~ <br />- <br />~ <br />~ <br />- <br />~ <br />I <br />~ <br />-- <br />i <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />II <br />. <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />SmaU Reservoir Feasibility Study <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />5-2 <br /> <br />Table 5-1 <br />Water Rights and Agreements Represented in Basin Model <br /> <br />Cameo rights without Orchard Mesa check <br />Shoshone rights, including both the 1250 cfs <br />and 158 cfs decrees <br />Senate Document 80 (CBT Project) <br />Green Mountain Permanent Operating Plan <br />Green Mountain Water Marketing operations <br />Consolidated Cases (Blue River Decree) <br />Denver rights, including the proposed Straight Creek <br />Project and Blue River exchanges <br />Colorado Springs rights <br />All major in-basin decrees and augmentation plans <br />Instream flow decrees and agreements <br />Summit County Agreement <br /> <br />The development projections and augmentation plans of all basin water users were <br />reviewed to compile estimates of current and future water demands. These projections were <br />verified by comparison to previous projections and the most recent County population <br />forecasts. In order to portray "worst case" impacts on Summit County, export systems were <br />generally assumed to divert up to their legal limits. In the case of Denver, this reflects the <br />assumption that Denver can exchange water up the Blue River utilizing aU remaining <br />exchange potential and results in the diversion of all Dillon inflow, undepleted by upstream <br />junior rights, in excess of 50 cfs. In all, demand schedules for 42 separate water uses were <br />developed for later use in the basin model. <br /> <br />DEFINTIlON OF WATER MANAGEMENT ALTERNATIvEs <br /> <br />An initial list of 37 water management alternatives, consisting of structural and non- <br />structural measures, was developed from previous studies, field reconnaissance, and <br />discussions with representatives of basin water supply agencies. These alternatives were <br />subjected to a two-stage screening process which utilized evaluation criteria relating to <br />technical, economic, environmental, and social feasibility. Table 5-2 lists the seven <br />alternatives that survived both steps of this process, These remaining alternatives were <br />carried forward for possible evaluation using the basin model. <br /> <br />Table 5-2 <br />Alternatives Surviving the Screening Process <br /> <br />Laskey Gulch Infiltration Gallery <br />Peru Creek Reservoir <br />Swan River Reservoir (below Muggins Gulch) <br />Subsurface storage on upper Blue River <br />Modified operations of Goose Pasture Tam <br />Modified operations of Clinton Gulch Reservoir <br />Rehabilitation/Enlargement of Old DiUon Reservoir <br />