Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />~_ _...:a.-..- ~ <br /> <br />000181 <br /> <br />NATIONAL FOREST RESERVED WATER RIGHT CLAIMS <br />COLORADO WATER DIVISION 2 <br />TECHNICAL WORKGROUP <br />STREAM SURVEY <br /> <br />SURVEY DATE: Julv 22, 1996 <br />STREAM NAME: Poncha Creek <br /> <br />STREAM NO: 79J <br /> <br />HYDROLOGY: <br />Drainage Area at Downstream Confluence: <br />Stream Gaging Stations: Poncha Creek at Poncha, <br />Average Flows: From USGS Surface Water Records Period of Record: 1912-18 <br />oct nov dec jan feb mar apr may jun jul aug sep Mean <br />cfs 11.8 8.81 6.32 5.50 6.14 7.46 20.8 81.0 91.3 27,1 15.4 8.44 24.1 <br />AF <br /> <br />NATURAL ENVIRONMENT: <br />Special Wildlife\Fish Habitat: <br />Threatened, Endangered and Sensitive Species if any: <br />Special Considerations: <br /> <br />QUESTIONS: <br />Would CWCB instream flows meet USFS needs? If not, why not?: <br /> <br />Yes, CWCS instreamflows will meet USFS needs. Subordination agreement protects <br />existing absolute and conditional water rights. Can not exchange to o 'Haver Reservoir <br />because stream is called out by downstream ditches below QP. <br /> <br />If water is developed from stream, what protections does the USFS know would have to <br />be provided? None identified. <br /> <br />Is potential development compatible with USFS needs? If not, why not? <br /> <br />RECOMMENDATIONS: <br />(i.e. can QP's be moved, CWCB instream flows acceptable, etc.) <br />1. So long as the QP remains near Shirley and the subordination of USFS claims to <br />existing water rights remains in-place, all parties recommend using the CWCS instream <br />flow of 8 cfs for quantification of the USFS claim. <br /> <br />ATTACHMENTS: List of attendees at July 22,1996 meeting, Stream map and list of water <br />rights in area provided by SEO, <br /> <br />RANDY\C:\MSOFFICE\WINWORD\D2FSRWR.79A <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />~1 <br /> <br />..1.. <br />