Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~ .;.} J.000223 <br /> <br />The Fruitland and Hogback Projects serve Indian land. All <br />four ditches were in operation and the extensions of the Fruitland <br />and Hogback were authorized for construction at the time of the sign- <br />ing of the upper Colorado River Basin Compact. The owners of the <br />ditches thus have a first and prior right in accordance with proviM <br />sions of Article XIV (al of the compact. <br />Water Supply. <br />A comparison of the monthly diversion requirement of the <br />four ditches with historic stream runoff data shows that the unregu- <br />lated flow of the San Juan River at the several points of diversion <br />has been adequate for the full irrigation of the lands. The con- <br />struction of the proposed Florida and the Animas-La Plata Projects for <br />use of Animas River w~ter upstream in Colorado and New Mexico will <br />result in some depletion in flow which under historic conditions has <br />been available for use by the four prior right ditches. Run-off data <br />show that the residual flow of the Animas with the Florida and the <br />Animas-La Plata Projects in operation together with the runoff of the <br />San Juan under historic conditions is adequate for the prior right <br />ditches. <br /> <br />The regulation and uses of water upstream proposed by the <br />State of New Mexico have been previously analyzed herein. These <br />would result in major depletion of the water supply available to <br />these four ditches. Even with the development of these uses, to- <br />gether with those mentioned on the Animas River in Colorado, there <br />would still remain sufficient total residual annual streamflows, if <br />regulated, to adequately meet the diversion requirements of the four <br />ditches. <br /> <br />-18- <br /> <br />,I <br /> <br />