WSP05904

• File Number: 8111.600
• Description: ARCA Annual Reports
• Basin: Arkansas
• Date: 6/1/1985
• Author: ARCA
• Title: Thirty-Sixth Annual Report Arkansas River Compact Administration for the Year 1984
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Annual Report

~-

':-.-:

year most of the snoW was on the west and this time it is on our side. We
were up in Leadville just 3 weeks ago and they told us what was 5 inches
of water more this year just in Tennessee Pass-Twin Lakes drainage area
and Monarch Pass. It is now twice as much as it was a year ago. So ttle
river is going to be pretty much able to take care of all of the increase so I
doubt if many of the entities will be using either their winter stored
water or project water this year.
Mr. Pope: Tom. let me ask you a question here. though, in terms of the
comments you made a minute ago about it wasn't the fault of t~~ w}ntcr
storage that caused it to go into the joint useupoof" However isn't it also
true that if that space was not available for winter storage water that that
water would have had to come on downstream and would h;,:lve ended up
in John Martin Reservoir? Let's just take an example that if the reservoir
\....as not able to be used for that purpose.
Mr. Thomson: I guess that you could say that, but then we are going to
end up with a beautiful civil war in Colorado with the ag people telling the
cities "get your water ouL" And Colorado Springs is going to say, "Go to
hell," and so 011. So it was designed then -I mean right now J wish that
they would have buill it for 400,000 then we wouldn't have that problem. I
don't know what the problem is with the joint use pool. It is good water
management practices to use thai space. The criteria \\.'as to get it out l1y
Apl'il15 and use flood control.
Mr. McDonald: Dave, I think that in a way you are right, but the point
I would emphasize is that had space not been availble to store that water
then the historic winter diversion practices would have gone forward and
the water would have been diverted out of the river. More than likely the
river would have heen dried up at Fort Lyon and you would have had
consumptive use occur. And the conditions on the winter storage program
were designed to insure that no greater consumption Occurs that
historically was the case. I think that the lack of the bucket or the lack of
the space doesn't lead to the conclusion, at all, that there would not have
been consumption and that water would have necessarily reached John
l\Iartin - that is not the case - there would have been winter diversions,
historically in many cases drying up the river.
Mr. Pope: Those entities that would have been diverting in priority
were not diverting - is that what you are saying?
Mr. McDonald: They did notthis year. They did not divert. If they are
in winter storage program they don't direct flow divert. You can't have
your cake and eat it too, you either have to be in the winter storage
program or not in it and doing your historical practice; but you don't do
both. Obviously. that would he double counting and inappropriate.
Mr. Pope: I understand that, but let's assume, with the year that we
have had. and as \\.'et as it has been, would they have diverted anyway-
even though. yes, physically they perhaps could have.
Mr. Thomson: You bet. If they are decree holders, you bet they would
have. Cause that's the law of the river - without the winter storage
program you use it or you lose it. All they have to do is go back and look at
the records prewinter storage and the river pretty well dried up the Fort
Lyon headgate because it \I,.'as going down Fort Lyon to Amity, Kicking
Bird and so on.
MI'. Pope: Let's take it one step further then in terms of winter storage
for the commg summer, in other words, storing water this winter for the

65

I