WSPC04991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~, OOa.5,2S>age 5 " December 4, 197. . , ISSUE NO.2 Should Trinchera, La Jara, Alamosa Creeks and all other tributary streams be subject to administration under the compact "call"? YES 1. There is no provision in the Rio Grande Compact, nor any evidence that the compact repealed Colorado water law or the Con- stitutional Doctrine of Prior Appropriation. 2. Article I (e) defines "tributary" as any stream that naturally contributes to the flow of the Rio Grande. 3. Section 148-21-2 (1) and (2) declare that underground and surface water must be used conjunctively and maximize the beneficial use of all of the waters of the state. 4. Section 138-21-3 declares all surface and underground water in or tributary to all natural streams as "waters of the state". 5. 148-21-3 (4) defines "underground water" as vlater in the unconsolidated alluvial aquifer and other sedimentary materials and all other waters hydraulically connected thereto tnfluencing move- ment of water in that aquifer or natural stream, 6. In the case of Trinchera, La Jara and Alamosa Creeks, evidence strongly supports the contention that these streams are tributary to the Rio Grande if not by direct surface flow, certainly by the tributary underground water as defined in Section 148-21-3 (4), 7. Failure to administer tributary streams is contrary to Section 148-21-35(2) and 148-21-17(3). 8. It is inconceivable that the compact negotiators did not recognize and take cognizance of the fact that there was inflow to the Rio Grande between the index stations and the Lobatos Gaging Station, The fact that these streams are not provided with index gaging stations is immaterial. NO 1. If the compact negotiators had intencied tributary streams such as Trinchera, La Jara and Alamosa Creeks to be subject to the compact, index stations would have been provided on these stream s.