My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04202
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04202
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:54:13 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:12:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8062.200
Description
Federal Reserved Water Rights - USFS - Water Division 2 - Negotiating Principles and Settlement
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
3/10/1997
Author
D Randolph Seaholm
Title
Technical Workgroup - Group 1 Stream Summary - March 10 1997
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.
/
23
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 />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />000187 <br /> <br />67D Clear Creek <br />QP at sec 15 - 12S - 80W; 100 feet upstream of the most upstream forest boundary <br />Amount: A CWCB instream flow of 15 cfs year round is acceptable at the QP. In <br />addition, USFS requests a high flow between May I and July 15 of at least 70% of <br />bankfull and up to 120 % of bankfull to move sands in stream. Group wanted more <br />definition (limits) on the high flow request and assurance that there would be some <br />upstream exchange potential particularly during runoff to accommodate existing and <br />future development in the basin, <br /> <br />7lA North Cottonwood Creek <br />QP at sec 9 - 14S - 79W; 100 feet upstream of the east section line (forest boundary) <br />Amount: A CWCB instream flow of? cfs year round is acceptable at the QP. <br /> <br />71B Cottonwood Creek <br />Deleted, split into South and Middle Cottonwood QP's, <br /> <br />7lB.1 Middle Cottonwood Creek <br />New QP at sec 24 - 14S - 80W; just above confluence with Huges Creek <br />Amount: A CWCB instream flow of 10 cfs year round is acceptable at the QP. In <br />addition, USFS requests a high flow between May 15 and July 15 of at least 70% of <br />bankfull and up to 120 % of bankfull to move sands in stream. Group wanted more <br />definition (limits) on the high flow request and assurance that there would be some <br />upstream exchange potential particularly during runoff, <br /> <br />7lB.2 South Cottonwood Creek <br />New QP at sec 2 - 15S - 80W; 100 feet upstream of the north section line <br />Amount: A CWCB instream flow of 10 cfs year round is acceptable at the QP, In <br />addition, USFS requests a high flow between May 15 and July 15 of at least 70% of <br />bankfull and up to 120 % of bankfull to move sands in stream. Group wanted more <br />definition (limits) on the high flow request and assurance that there would be some <br />upstream exchange potential particularly during runoff. <br /> <br />75A Chalk Creek (2 alternatives discussed to current QP) <br /> <br />75A.1 Chalk Creek - alternative 1 <br />New QP at sec 32 - 15S - 80W; NF Chalk Creek 100 feet upstream of private inholding <br />New QP at sec 12 - 51N - 5E; Chalk Creek 100 feet upstream of east section line <br />New QPat sec 30 - 15S - 79W; Baldwin Creek at County Road 162 <br />Amount on NF Chalk Creek: A CWCB instream flow of 8 cfs year round is acceptable at <br />the QP. In addition, USFS requests a high flow between May 15 and July 15 of at least <br />70% of bankfull and up to 120 % of bankfull to move sands in stream. Group wanted <br />more definition (limits) on the high flow request and assurance that there would be some <br />upstream exchange potential particularly during runoff. <br />Amount on Chalk Creek above St Elmo: A CWCB instream flow recommendation <br />needs to be made and would likely be deemed acceptable, In addition, USFS requests a high <br />flow between May IS and July 15 of at least 70% of bankfull and up to 120 % of <br />bankfull to move sands in stream, Group wanted more definition (limits) on the high <br />flow request and assurance that there would be some upstream exchange potential <br />particularly during runoff. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />i, <br />,..it <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.