PROJ00515 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I The above analysis shows conclusively that a call by New Mexico does not pose a threat to the project, assuming that a 1967 multiple use right is available. Except for the 1967 right, the project water rights are not vulnerable to a call under Article IV of the Upper Basin Compact. This is because the Pagosa Pipeline decree is exempt by virtue of its early appropriation date. It is conceivable that a 1967 water right could be called out if the State of Colorado elected to impose the "call" on a basin-wide priority basis. However, the USBR projections of depletion for Colorado are true, it will be approximately the year 2040 before such a call would occur (see Appendix E). Given that amount of lead time, numerous options for purchase or exchange of water should become available. Thus, the threat of a compact call is too remote to be of significant concern to this project~ 3.7 RESERVOIR OPERATION STUDY The purpose of the operation study is to determine the ability of the proj ect to provide timely deliveries of water to meet the demands of project beneficiaries. 3.7.1 Previous Studies The Turkey Creek Reconnaissance Report (Western Engineers, 1985), reported storable inflows at two different reservoir sites for "worst case" and "most probable" conditions. For the worst case, when water was available in the stream, we assumed that all Turkey Creek rights of record, including the 1967 conditional decree for 30 cfs, had to be fully supplied, before any proj ect water could be stored. Senior decrees and Indian claims on the San Juan were also honored. The most probable case assumed a senior winter demand on Turkey Creek that was equal to the average historic flows in the Snowball Ditch, plus the domestic portion of the Strawn and Turkey Creek No. 2 Ditches. Summer senior demands were assumed to be equal to historic diversions plus the balance of the Snowball Ditch decrees. Such demands were exclusive of the 1967 rights 3-10