Laserfiche WebLink
<br />An investi tion of the established water rights in and around the San Miguel study area was undertaken to <br />determine ,ho has legal claims to the water in the area, how much water has been claimed, and the order of <br />priority of he claims. This information was obtained from the State Engineer's Water Rights Data Base. <br />, , <br />Tabulation ! of these water rights were compiled and subtjtitted to all ditch companies, the SMWCD and the <br />Water Con Inissioner for Water District 60 for review and comment. The water rights considered for use in the <br />San Miguel Project are summarized in Table 1II-1. <br /> <br />A check of ownstream water rights on the Dolores River ill Colorado was also made to determine if there were <br />, , <br />, ' <br />any waterghts which would control the operation of the ~an Miguel River and its tributaries. No controlling <br />rights were found, and discussions with the W ater Commis~ioner for Water District 60 confirmed that none had <br />, , <br />ever been 'ercised. Further, there is no interstate compact between Colorado and Utah for the Dolores River <br />which migh control the operation of the San Miguel River. ' <br /> <br />TABLE III-l <br />WATER RIGHTS CONSIDERED FOR USE IN SAN MIGUEL PROJECT 1) <br />, <br /> <br /> Storage Diversion <br /> Institution (acre-feet) (cubic-feet/second) <br />Fa tuers' Water 11,432 1,011 <br />De lIelopment Company <br /> I <br />Lo 'e Cone Ditch & 2,265 188 <br />Re ervoir Company <br />Lil lands Canal & 489 99 <br />Re ervoir Company 7P2 (C) 14 (C) <br /> 1M Hughes Ditch , <br />H None 40 <br /> i , <br />Sa I Miguel Water 186,9bo (C) 675 (C) <br />Co ~servancy District <br /> I <br /> <br />1) Ri hts are absolute except those noted as conditiom;d (C). <br />, <br /> <br />11I.2 <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />