WSP07211 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

1560 II. Summary · Arkansas River Legal & Institutional Analysis In response to the large numbers of demands placed upon it. the Arkansas River is one of the most intensively managed rivers in the western United States. By definition. a summary will omit many of the details tegarding the laws. institu- tions, facilities. water rights, and Water m:mage- mem: operations mat playa role in river manage- ment. Therefore. the focus of a summary must be upon elements of river management which have the greatest impact on the flows in the study reach between Turquoise lake/Twin lakes and Pueblo Reservoir. Intensive river management efforts have not dra~ matically changed the annual hydtogtaph of the river in the study reach. Rather. river manage- ment has had rhe effect of maintaining peak spring runoff Haws at the approximately the same level. has slightly increased late summer and early fall flows, and has increased October through March flows by an avenge of 100 cli;. The magni- tude of the tiver managemem elements discussed below can be assessed by comparing the number of acre-feet involved co the averoge annual flow of the river for the 1990 to 1995 period ar the Canon City stream gage. which was 550.000 acre feet. A. Native River Flows and Senior Downstream Water Rights By 1884, all the typical flows of the Arkansas River, exclusive of peak spring runoff and storm evems. had been apptopriated by agricultural usets in the lower Arkansas River valley. Although some water use was occurring upstream of Canon City on the main stem and tributaries. the large number of downsrream warer rights insured that most native flows stayed in the river in the river at least to Pueblo. The ability of these water rights to pull Water down to the lower Arkansas Vallev was enhanced when ditch companies ~onstruer~d and obtained decrees for more than 400,000 aere feet of reservoir space to store diversions. Today. chert an: 23 major dirch sysrems diverting warer between Pueblo and the Colorado-Kansas border. B. Early Transmountain Diversions and Upper Basin Storage Facilities By 1935,43,000 aere feet was imported annually from other basins into the Arkansas River basin. Some of this total was made up of sever:tllarge, open ditches that crossed the continental divide. bur the majority of this amount was comprised of importS through the Busk-Ivanhoe System and the Twin lakes Project. Development of the Busk-tvannoe Sysrem allowed. diversion of watet from the headwaters of the Ftyingpan River to lake Fork Creek via the Carlton Tunnel. Developmem of the Twin lakes Project allowed importation of water from the headwaters of the Roaring Fork River to the North Fork of lake Creek via the Twin lakes Tunnel. A[ me rime of construcrion, rhese sysrems provid- ed warer exclusively for agricultural use in the lower Arkansas River Valley. In cases whete these diversions were not stored high in ,he basin, the systems had the effeer of increasing flows duting spring runoff and early summer in the main stem. These systems conrinue co operate today, although some of the imparted Haws are direered to storage before being released to the main stem. Today, the Twin lakes system imporrs an averoge of 54.500 acre-feet annually. and the Busk- Iv:mhoe System imporrs an average of 5,081 acre feet annually, The Wertz. Ewing, and Columbine ditches import an averoge of 4.971 acre feet annually. 7