My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02305
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02305
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:36:06 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:02:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8220.106
Description
Animas-La Plata
State
CO
Basin
San Juan/Dolores
Water Division
7
Date
12/1/1994
Author
Bookman-Edmonston
Title
Economic Impact Study - Animas-La Plata and Colorado Ute Water Rights Settlement Act
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.
/
81
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />REGIONAL ECONOMY WITHOUT PROJECT <br /> <br />attempted, it is likely that failure to construct ALP would result in litigation concerning the <br />Tribes' reserved water rights. There exist different options as to whether the litigation <br />would reach only as far as the reserved water rights for the Animas and La Plata Rivers, or <br />if failure to construct ALP would jeopardize the entire Settlement Agreement, thereby <br />litigating the water rights for all claims by the Tribes. For the purposes of this analysis, it <br />is assumed that failure to construct ALP would only impact the claims on the Animas and <br />La Plata Rivers and the measure of this impact would correspond to the amount of water <br />diverted for project purposes by the Tribes from ALP as specified in the Settlement <br />Agreement and as summarized below in Table 3.3. The question also remains whether both <br />Tribes would litigate or whether only one Tribe would choose to negotiate and accept <br />substitute benefits to those described in the Settlement. For purposes of this analysis, it is <br />assumed that both Tribes would choose to litigate. <br /> <br />TABLE 3.3 <br /> <br /> Indian Water Supply from ALP <br /> (acre-feet per year) <br /> Ute Mountain Ute Southern Ute Total <br />Irrigation 27,200 3,400 34,600 <br />M&I 6,000 26,500 32,500 <br />TOTAL 33,200 29,900 63,100 <br /> <br />It is unclear through litigation which river, either the Animas or the La Plata, would supply <br />a like amount of water that would have been delivered through ALP. It is also unclear <br />what facilities would be necessary for the Tribes to develop this 63,100 acre-feet of water, <br />particularly because the average annual streamflow for the La Plata River at Hesperus is <br />only 29,960 acre-feet per year and the La Plata River Compact divides the water between <br />the states of New Mexico and Colorado on essentially an equal basis. It is assumed that the <br />Tribes would obtain an 1868 priority date for their claims on these rivers, which would be <br />senior to nearly all other water rights. For purposes of this discussion, it is fairly assumed <br />that all of the La Plata River flows would be required to satisfy the Indian claims, and the <br />remainder of the claims would be supplied from the Animas River. It is also assumed that <br /> <br />3-8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.