Laserfiche WebLink
<br />o <br />o <br />r-:> <br />... <br />(Xl <br />..... <br /> <br />WATER RIGHTS PRIORITY APPROACH <br /> <br />The Water Rights Priority approach is outlined in the Board's "Plan of Study" document, dated <br />March 17, 1994. The Board staff believes this approach is very defensible based on Judge <br />Brown's decision in the Taylor Park Refill case (upheld in the Supreme Court), However, it <br />results in many water rights being identified as potentially undevelopable without certain senior <br />rights being bought out or abandoned. Subsequently this approach has not highly regarded with <br />the water community, and is perceived by many as making it more difficult for development of <br />a large project. <br /> <br />While this process is fairly objective in that it relies on the Water Right Tabulation, it is <br />subjective in how the consumptive use of each right is determined. Most of the senior rights <br />exist in the Colorado River mainstem and San Juan River, while the majority of the undeveloped <br />(not to be confused with unappropriated) water supplies are in the Gunnison and Yampa Rivers. <br /> <br />DEMAND APPROACH <br /> <br />The water demand approach does not look at water rights or the priority system, rather it looks <br />at potential future water needs. These water needs or demands are derived by forecasting future <br />activities, estimating the water requirements for those activities, and reviewing potential water <br />projects that would be able to meet those needs in each subbasin. The estimated demands are <br />independent of any water right considerations and therefore no water rights are specifically <br />attached to any demand, This eliminates many of the concerns water users have with the priority <br />approach and subsequent diligence proceedings on their conditional water rights. This approach <br />might consist of the following steps: <br /> <br />I. Board staff could provide each committee with information from a set of reports prepared <br />for the Board by Clifford Jex in the early 1960's along with the current Colorado River <br />depletion schedule. The JeJl: reports, while old, attempted to identify an ultimate level of <br />consumptive use from each subbasin. <br />2. Using this information as a starting point, each committee could then identify specific points <br />on the stream at which demands would be determined. Disaggregating and updating this <br />information using data from more recent reports such as the Yampa study and the Gunnison <br />Phase I study could then be done. Factors such annual yield, water quality, compacts, and <br />other environmental concerns could be considered along with new uses. <br />3. Once an estimate of the ultimate level of depletions has been determined, then the present <br />water demand is subtracted to get an estimate of the future water development projection. <br />Included in the future water development projection would be any reasonably foreseeable <br />demands. <br />4. These future demands would then be compared to gaged streamflows and instream flow <br />appropriation recommendations developed. <br />5. Careful consideration and documentation would be required throughout this process so that <br />the end product would be defensible in water court. <br /> <br />16 <br />