My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC05202
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
18000-18999
>
WSPC05202
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:42:44 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 5:05:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
7630.625
Description
Wild and Scenic - Wild and Scenic Rivers Act
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
8/13/1981
Author
Various
Title
Comments - RE-South Platte River Basin Interim Report
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
146
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />002512 <br /> <br />Julesburg Irrigation District <br />114 West 1st Street <br />Julesburg, Colorado 80737 <br /> <br />August 13, 1981 <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />823 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br /> <br />Attn: J. William McDonald, Director <br /> <br />~.Ji~@~~WZ1]~! <br />111\( n!I:~ 1 "'98'1 11111 <br />~~ 11_,-. d I ,~ <br />(;OUJRADO WATER <br />CQ;'JSF=r:;.l1'Y'f'!rlf\1 r;-:n '. i" <br />. ....... ..: ~:.:' .., I,' <br /> <br />Dear Mr. McDonald: <br /> <br />Following are my thoughts related to your questions. <br /> <br />Why were we given so little time out of the 2 years to study the <br />document. <br /> <br />Relative to accuracy - the statement on page 47 about augmentation pland and <br />damage prevention is inaccurate. <br /> <br />As a question, I wonder why no mention is made of Senate Bill 81 which in- <br />cluded ground water into the priority system. <br /> <br />Page 93, Paragraph 2, implying a reduction of water for energy; history shows <br />a contradiction to this statement based on "flushes" discussed below. <br /> <br />Nebraska is beginning to discuss the need for amendment to the compact <br />because of ground water use and junior diverters to the compact, without an <br />equitable supply of injury water. <br /> <br />Relative to the alternative for consideration; alternative 8 is the major <br />and should be the priority alternative which is predicted upon the primary <br />importance of an "on stream" structure. This is the alternative I favor and note <br />that many of the other alternatives are only additions to this one and could <br />be added later. <br /> <br />Some of the more important reasons for this choice are as follows: <br /> <br />1. The mean annual flow delivery to Nebraska stated on Page 30 of <br />approximately 300,000 Ave. Ft. is not all functionally available, <br />as useable water. Off stream reservoirs and direct flow ditches <br />experience extreme difficulty taking water during a "flush" <br />situation without losing their diversion structures. Consequently, <br />increased rains which create a "flush" situation produce water which <br />is functionally non useable to Nebraska irrigators and to diverters <br />in the Lower South Platte area. <br /> <br />~"""".,",.....~. .~..~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.