WSP03226 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I'! "I'" ..,." '~'.j J'? - ~ '~d COLORADO RIVER COMPACT WATER DEVELOPMENT PROJECTION November 2, 1995 FINAL REPORT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 2 share which each subbasin contributes to the natural flow of the Colorado River originating within Colorado but, again, only to the extent that water is physically available for appropriation, These ranges, which are shown in columns (G) and (H) of Table 4,should provide the fl~xibility for full compact development to occur as it normally would under stllte water law and, assure that future development opportunities in Colorado are constrained by Colorado's compact apportionment rather than the instream flow wat~ rights. B. Colorado's compact apportionment is dependent on both the long term water supply and the assumptions made concerning the Law of the Colorado River. There are varying assumptions relating to water supply and the Upper Basin states' obligation to meet one-half of the Mexican Treaty commitment, which result in consumptive use apportionment. values for Colprado ranging between 3.079 MAF and 3.855 MAF. As a result, a range of development allowance opportunities for each of the seven subbasins is recommended. C. Aeonservative assumption should be made in which all future water detrelopment may occur under water rights which will be junior in priority to the endangered fish recovery instream flow 'Water rights. There are numerous decreed conditional water rights with the combined cap~bility to more than fully develop Colorado's remaining compact apportionment, and we recogtiizethat future development of Colorado's remainine compact apportionment will most likety reflect a combination of both new water rights and the development of senior conditional water rights. In many cases, the water rights developed may be rel~g on the ability to reuse water which has previously been used. The recommended appro~h is intended to. provide a safety factor sufficient to allow water rights junior to the alj,ticipated instream flow water rights to fully utilize the remainder of Colorado's apportionljient. D. The development of senior conditional water rights should not be imP'lmed by a. junior ,CWCB. instreaD,1 flow right, although we assume that any changes of senior water ri~ts (e.g., changescin use, point of diversion, etc.) will conform to the "no injury" starldard with respect to the t:WCB's instream flow rights and all other water rights. It is understood 1:hl(t in conforming to the "no injury" standard some additional limitations may be placed on the ability to change water rights. E. The hydrologic information provided by the CWCB staff only includes waters which originate in Colorado and thus water from the Little Snake in Wyoming (200,000+ AF) and certain flows tributary to the San Juan in New Mexico (approximately 180,000 AF) are not included in the hydrology used to evaluate the various alternatives. There was not total agreement on this approach, but it was agreed that this was a conservative approach which avoided the need to make assumptions about what might or might not occur in our neighboring states. F. We have not advocated the construction of any particular water project, nor should our recommendations prevent the development of any water project; we have been as neutral as possible in this regard. G. Given the numerous uncertainties which exist, we do not recommend the appropriation of all the waters available for appropriation within any basin for instream flow protection without carving out or otherwise protecting a development allowance adequate to assure the flexibility to continue developing Colorado's water supplies in a responsible 1> ;<, \: i ~-i