|
<br />. LamaJ: (Co.) Tri-State Daily News, Wed., April 12, 1978, Page!
<br />
<br />...Ft,,\l..yon-,wster.attorney challe"ges .Ighost' article.. ..
<br />". . .-\ -',". .''- '-',' ;\-,--,,,'.~:, . -"';, - "."' . "-'-'. dthosetenns"and,con- thirty-year penod Wlth"nomtert
<br />IEditor~s "'Note:, 'ThiALa Joot? '.-transfer that pro~ right"-to the' to- be' transferred is the amount 'of would --have. to be written into any Thedhird article questioDS.wheth~ ~ee, an . . provisions. Mostlikely, the State co,
<br />Tctbune-Democrat -and the Rocky John Marti:1 Reservoir not- consumptiveusedWhoeverwrotejhe Court decree because the decree of the ~ort.Lyon Canal Company.: dlti!ln5:nserted Insum-John"Martin make more money oo',the shar
<br />Ford Gaiette. boJ:h Otero County withstanding a restriction on the face article got some legal ooncepts mixed the cOnsolidated is: limited to ap- exposmg Itself "to the _threat of tal. were I .' _ ' .' simply by leaving the shares in t
<br />newspapers; in late March carried a of the certificates that the water was up with eaCh other. Consumptive use Pl'oximiately 44.30 second' feet. You that could fragment.. the Fort Lyo~ J!l stor~ge .ngh!S would ~ used In con- Catlin Canal and leasing them to oth
<br />series of _three J!,rticles -dealing" with .limited to irrigation use:iDside Otero is relevant when an applicant desires should note. in adQition, that the much the same fasbion as the C.a~lm IS nee.tion. With ,reqUired .storage, Catlin shareholders. .
<br />'the trading of Catlin Ditch water County. , . to change the use of the water, but the diversion figures which' I have tieing fragmented." As I mentIoned dellvenes und~ the contra~t m. order . Everything considered, the contra.
<br />shares oWned 0)' the -DiviSiqri '.1Jf !.:ast summer, the Water COuH ruled . figure ,is irrelevent when the water previously given y~' already. reflect ,earlier, the person who own;; the to help establish and ~81ntam the if accepted by the Fort Lyon Can
<br />Wildlife.' for 'an approximately-sifuilar ..that the_Shares were' restricted to.use will be applied to the sa.me use at a the bypass requirements to the water ~hare o:.vns ,a p:oportlo~te pennan~nt pool. -, .' . C;ompany, would be a compromise
<br />amount of Fort Lyon Canal Co., water., in Otero Cotmty' and granted a sum- different location. In short, the Water Consolidated Canal. The 28 year share In the.. water ~ght which ReservOir alr:eady has a storage nght best. Neither the Wildlife Commissi.
<br />Suc~ a s.wap has been contemplated to ~ judgment dismissing the State's' Court will not refer to conswnptive. average, in sum, a~dy reflects and ,represents a property ngh~. Yn~r transf~ .!? it which ,wo~d have nor the Fort Lyon Canal Compal
<br />create a permanent, pool behinli application to transfer' the water. to. use figures in order to determine how includes all bypass requirements. No present. t;:olor.ado. law,. l1Tlgation been III prlOrlt~, on . a consIderable would be entirely pleased with <
<br />John ,Martin Dam. ,., ii, -, John. MartinnReservoir. -&metime muchwatershouldbetransferredtoa additionalbypassrequir.ementswillbe CQmpames may m:pose reasonable IlUplberofoccasIonssmce~96Sexcept those provisions. In some years, tI
<br />":"lI';l"either The G~t~ nor '" after that, attOrneys for the State and new point of diversion when- the water imposed simply because the'point of rules and' regulations throl,lgh their. that ~e_ 'decree pro",:!de? that Fort Lyon Canal Company 'could (
<br />T~~ne-Dep'locrat i~entif~ _'. e "Duane, Helton ~om the, Colora.do, will be used for the same use at the diversion i~ being moved .doWnstream. .bylaws, and there is ~asiona~y' measunng guages had to be liIsta~led well: and in other years it might ha1
<br />ongmator of the story, a~ ,Water q:>OSE;rVation "Boaro met Wltb newpointofdiv~ion. 'The ConsoMated Canal SImply cannot some litigation to determme what IS before the dec:ee became operative. to gIve up more stora,ge water than
<br />,in turn, Iie\!~ a13nz.,.p1~~ ,the .Boar.d. of. Directors of the Fort. The relevant figures inVolve "receive more water. than'its decrees:...~ meant by the -word reasonable. .Since ~ose mea~urmg guages were not really wanted- to give up. In the lor
<br />articles" cited ;e..~ur.ce_'?r~~iJ?f'-, Ly~n ~ C9mpany to.-prOpo$e the. distances and river losses over those ..entitle i~toreceive:.-, ,- . _ ,~ the water share is. literally a pi~'9f: . lllstal~e:;IWltillastfall. Had theguages run, the real beneficiary of the co:
<br />formation:':'~ ': -" '-'- :;-., \..f;: ,. . basic elemen~ of the sO ~lled swap. distance,<;. The third arti~e saYll thai.- It is true that sto~age wa~er IS mou: property;' however, it. would be ex. been III last slmlII,1er,_~e ~ferred , tract,. provided everything workS :
<br />,The ~mar -Tri:State Dail>:':~.e':'(5 F?llo~ilg ,Mw:.initial.-~tation of'. there are 239-nver miles between the, valuable. than .direct flow w~~i;. tremely difficult if not impossible. to muddy cr.eek. reseryOI! n,ght wo~d. planned! woUld be those people wt
<br />took Jhe llberty.to contact Wayneli~.' .the- proposal oy the State;the proposal Catlin diversion structlire and the Fort because 1t can be stored.a.nd used ,it'~;;, preclude. a sharebQlder. from sellmg have _been -I!l. pnonty on _ three wQuld -lIke to see a permanent po
<br />Schroeder oI the Law Offices' of has been written and r.ewritte:n sO Lyon diver.sion structure. In fact, lh.e later time. This propoSition assu~: his share to soinebody who wanted to separ~te oceaslO~. Another. 8,435 acre established in the John i\tarti
<br />yranesh, Ra~-and Schroedef.,l~;G,;:. ,.:m~y . times; that it' bears',"liWe distance is 28,6 miles. I do not know ,that tl).e.two decrees'.have the,~e" "beasbarehoider. .. ..feet of stor.age. ~t l~~t-the mud?Y Reser.void~ fIShing and recreation<
<br />in Boulder; who acts as special resemblance to the initiitJ. .proposal._ where the 239 mile figure came from, priarity." If the storage_t1e~ee ...hf!S_.,.~ The first rli. 1 tions that the creek ~Olr.".ll1te -IS presen~y Ill- purposes. (Wayne BSchroederJ.
<br />counselfortherortLYOJ!..~Ql:Iowlng_>.14anY_;~ges 'We!e made.at.the 'but I think the figure will reacli. priority junior. to'~e,.dl~:~?W .' ..a ,c.e,me~becauSe the Vl?~ved.lnthetransf~proceed.mg,to
<br />arehisanswerstosomeoflheclaims request-- of the -For:t Lyon Canal' almost to the State line.-TheCatlin decree itcannotcomemtopnpn~ ~ty_.will be Injure - . -'of bnngIt to John.MartinReser.volr..The
<br />put forth'ln, the two Otera County. ,ComWny _and oat Ule ~est of ' the Canal diVersion structure is lOcated. at until the direct flow' decree h3S-<t'ieep sw~ip:~ill r.es,~t i~~the_':ve~ore . to bUyba~k thesbares and offered., as
<br />publicatiollV: .<CVM) - State.' The final chang~-;were niade. mile post' 61 and the Fort - Lyon' saf:isiied and for that reason. ty?i~lly "cl~:r- -i-:-:ater, ra ~;" Whoever' I recall, ~ ,per. share paid over a
<br />The first articleconcentr.ate(l on the by tbeSta.~, and the Fort LionBO!ird diversion structW'e is located at mile, ; beComes l~ valuable,- As -!l1;:IBallP.Il_ val~. ..~uddy wa_ ::. _. " The CatlinCarial Company did offer
<br />first '.'g~" made by the W~~e di~.-nOt_liavethe opportwlity to~~e post 89.6, leaving a difference of 28.6 . developed in the arid west, J;lE!~f~Y,,-~: ~te-:tti_e article- may, have_for.gotten .'to buy back the shares ando.ffered,as
<br />COmmISSiOn when. the Comnusslon finished product before 'the Wildlife miles, which' is the figur.e used by the of the early decrees were fO't.,~ct tha:t'hr~968 the State: transf~ 5,900 I recall $500 per share paid pver a
<br />pur.chas~ ~e ~tIin' Canal C~~y,: '~inissio:n-reviewedit,andapproved Division Engineer's office. Tbe . flow purposes. It was~ acre:I~ of a mliQdy'creek reSt!:r.voir. '
<br />shares: ~t 15 true that the Wildlife . It. Th~ w~ some ;~~n~es . of Division Engineer'\ office used to . years, latl7r that the. ~a.r:ners_, stpc1.'age right .to .John ~tin Reser- . .
<br />CommISSiOn- purchased 2,097.58 shares :. SlIbsl:J!.ill:eo''Which may or. ,may'not be deduct.W per. cent ~r mjlli' between construct storage facilities for s -voir. The transfer was consented to by' ..', .
<br />-of.C~t1in :-vater, a~d ~t-the Com-. acceptable to me, the Fort: ~yon milepostsinordertodetennineriv~;. .water. For that;reason ~06~., the Amity provided that certain tenns:' "
<br />miSSion paId IIOmethlug III excess of $1-.-;. B:oaM or the shareholders of-the Fort loss. Since those figures were .-storage decrees. .c~ed;,>'i~?F 'and conditions we~e inserted inUl the.~~...t~.~..,. .
<br />million. The precise figures'alwaYll'~ Lyon Canal Company, It is'notknown generated; a computer study by Russ prioritieS. : ",'; '. . .,' .:'..' " "
<br />s,eem to vary_ just a little bit, and I . WlJether the Division !:Veer will use Livingston in' July of 19'16 demon.
<br />have seen the figures range fr.om the ne:w.6r old figures ,In c~culating strates that there couid be a loss,of
<br />$50,000' to_ $200,000 over the $1 million: river 1985ell; , -' ." 2.74 per cent -per mile durj,ng periods
<br />figure. I do not kriow.which is correct. The fli'st. _part'of the ,pr~l will . of low floW and a loss of ,035 per cent
<br />Similarly, I do not know whether the._ involve. th~_'.chan(e in ,poiilt:,:of diver- per mile during periods of high flow.
<br />mark,et value'of the water wheri"the': sion from the diversion..structure oJ When you multiply those figureS
<br />shares were purchased was $2SO as the Catlin Canal downwtnam to.the against the. 28.6 figure,_' you can
<br />opposed to $500. As far. as I lmow, diversion structuri! of the;. Fort .Lyon determine that the maximum carriage
<br />there was no eStablished ma'rKet v~l~ "Irrigation Canal. The 'lhm:L8r:ticle '.transit loss be7,B per cent during low
<br />on the shares prior t.o the_-purchase. ~e;sl:!L-lhat.'~_Catlin &~;.'in:' flowand1.0l"per-centbetweenthetwo
<br />because few shares.'had-.been pur:- . valved ~present 8,000,'to 10,ooq;acre ,headgates"-during high flow. In fact,
<br />chased prior to.the'tr.ansaction in- feet of water-at Catlin's'diversion however,the.riverisagainingreach
<br />. volving the State. That. structure. In .some years~.tbat is' ac. between the two headgates and the
<br />maUer., however, is behind the State, ". curate. In other yeats, that is' high. iosses would most likely be reduced to
<br />and the Wildlife Commission:-',wanted Over an approximate 28 ye&- peric;Id," reflect the river-gains between the two
<br />to do something with' the:shares .which , the diversions under the State's share beadga.tes. I do 'not have precise
<br />it had pur.cb:;1Sed. Under Colorado taw, "of the Catlin water averaged out at figures on the river gain between the
<br />the sbares_-represent a pro rata in- about- 7 ,435 -a~ feet ',per year. The two beadga~,b'ut those figur.es would
<br />terest in'the-waterrightitself.,That is,., figure will gcf tip slightly or down serve to,reduce the river loss.
<br />the shareholder 'and- not the'mutual' SlightlY'''dependmg upOn -Which-years' The third article mentions that
<br />irrigation 'company owns the water . are useq -fgr the average.. The thir.d water. would have to be' bypassed to
<br />right. Like other interests in real article 'Suggests that tbe Water Court meet the needs of the consolidated
<br />:property, lhe water right may, be is wry' likely to aUbs1:antialIy reduce Canal. The Fort Lyon Canal Company
<br />.transferred; and in this instance the the amount of water 'transferred has always had to bypass ap--
<br />water. right was transferred to the downstre,am -to the new point of proximately 50 second feet.to meet the
<br />State' of Colorado. In short, the State diversion: The article is absolutely demands of that ditch company and it
<br />purchased . pro~y and h:ie.d - to incorrect when it says that the amount is unlikely that any additional bypass
<br />
<br />Patronize Our
<br />
<br />Advertisers
<br />
<br />
<br />HAULING TRASH picked up during the Student:'Co~ncil
<br />'clean up campaign were Chuck Placel in the driver's seat, ,
<br />and Kent Carlson, standing, The boys are se.niors at Lamar.
<br />High School.
<br />
<br />HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT COUNCIL
<br />recently held a uclean-up competition.'1 Classes ~mpeted
<br />'. against each other in the effort to make sprucing up road
<br />ways and grounds fun. Seniors participating were Annette
<br />Howe, Jane Greenfield and Jean Kerr.
<br />
<br />'')a'''
<br />
<br />". ^",,,
<br />
|