WSPC04991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

:ODO~2'7 .' ,,: !>age 7 ," , December 4, 1973 . ISSUE NO, 3 Should junior tributary underground water appropriators be curtailed when senior surface water rights are curtailed under the compact "call" or injured during periods of low surface run off? YES 1. Section 148-21-3(4) defines defines underground water hydraulically connected to the natural stream to be a part of that natural stream, 2, Being subjected to the same priority system as the sur- face water rights makes it imperative that the State Engineer ad- minister those underground water appropriations within the priority system. 3. By intercepting return flow to the river, or directly depleting surface flow, wells not only deplete the surface flow in times of need by senior surface water rights but also diminish the delivery of compa ct commitments at the state line requiring further curtailment of senior surface rights, 4. The Water Law enacted in 1969 made ample provision for underground water appropriations to be decreed and provided for augmentation, exchange or replacement water to remedy injury to senior water rights, NO 1. A tremendous economy has been built on the use of underground water in the San Luis Valley and it would be disastrous to destroy this economy by shutting off wells, 2, Well pumping does not interfere with the surface flows in the stream and it would serve no useful purpose to curtail wells, STATE ENGINEER'S POSITION The 1969 Water Rights Determination and Administration Act, referred to as Article 148-21 or Senate Bill 81, provided that tributary underground water and the surface stream are a common source of supply and would be administered as such. The economic impact of rigid enforcement of the priority system without providing for a transition time would result in serious economic difficulty in the San Luis Valley. A gradual increase of curtailment of tributary underground water appropriations will provide well owners an opportunity to