Laserfiche WebLink
<br />February 13,1998 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />1 ,1 0 {) <br /> <br />have been had the Model Reservoir right not been transferred. To our knowledge, the State Engineer <br />has never made such a determfuation. <br /> <br />In our opinion, the available engineering studies do not provide sufficient information to conclude that <br />operations according to the existing Operating Principles have not resulted in injury to downstream <br />Colorado water rights, or have been in compliance with the terms and conditions required by the <br />Model Reservoir transfer decree. Accordingly, we do not believe that the Arkansas River Compact <br />Administration should consider any amendments related to the storage of winter water until such time <br />as it has engineering studies documenting that the proposed changes can be implemented without <br />causing injury to downstream Colorado water rights, <br /> <br />Municipal and Industrial Use of Project Water <br /> <br />It is our understanding that the City of Trinidad owns certain of the Project water rights and wishes to <br />change the use of its water rights from irrigation to municipal and industrial uses and for <br />replenishment of the permanent fishery pool in Trinidad Reservoir. Trinidad has filed an application <br />with the Division 2 Water Court requesting approval of a change of use and point of diversion of its <br />Project water rights. The current Operating Principles do not provide for changes of use of Project <br />water. Trinidad's water court application has been held in abeyance until such time as the Operating <br />Principles have been amended to allow the change of use. <br /> <br />The substantive language regarding change of use procedures in the proposed amendments is included <br />in Article IV - ~.3. 1bis paragraph provides that: a) only water attributable to the historic <br />consumptive use of the District water supply allocated for acreage removed from irrigation may be <br />used for M&I or permanent fishery pool use; b) historic return flow patterns associated with the <br />previous irrigation use shall be maintained; c) removal of land from irrigatiori to enable M&I or <br />permanent fishery pool use will correspondingly reduce the number of acres allowed to be irrigated <br />with the District water supply; and d) water stored to maintain historic return flow patterns shall be <br />stored in the irrigation capacity of Trinidad Reservoir but such water shall not be accounted for as <br />stored water in administration of the water storage limitations of the irrigation capacity. <br /> <br />In general, we do not believe that the proposed amendments to allow changes of use of Project water <br />should be of concern to downstream water users. The proposed language requires quantification of <br />the historic consumptive use, dry-up of previously irrigated land, and maintenance of historic return <br />flows, Downstream Colorado water users may participate in the water court proceedings to ensure <br />that proper terms and conditions are imposed upon the change of use to prevent i11iury. <br /> <br />However, we do not understand the rationale for not counting water stored for subsequent release to <br />maintain return flow patterns against the storage limitations of the irrigation capacity (Article IV _ ~ <br />B.3(d)). Such water would have historically been stored and counted against those limitations. Proper <br />justification should be obtained, or this item should be eliminated from the proposed amendments. <br /> <br />'- <br />