My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07340
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07340
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:26:51 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:16:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8430.100
Description
Platte River Basin-Water User Groups and Conservancy-Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
9/1/1955
Author
JR Barkley
Title
Utilization of Blue River Water Supply and Green Mountain Reservoir in Fulfillment of Obligations Under Senate Document No 80
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.
/
16
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 />0010~1~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />4. The cities agr,ee to be bound by the provisions of Article "5" of Senate <br /> <br />Document 80 and further amplify their position by specifYing that <br /> <br />"future water" as referred to in paragraph "5-c" shall be deemed to <br /> <br />include municipal, agricultural and industrial uses (but not power <br />generation) initiated subsequent in date of decree to June 24, 1946. <br />5. The cities concede decrees for Granby Reservoir and Adams Tunnel of <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />priority dates in 1936 and for Green Mountain Reservoir in 1937. <br />Presuming the amplification of paragraph "5-6" of Senate Document 80, as set forth <br />~n the settlement offer, to relate only to the 100,000 acre-feet specified in paragraph <br />r:5-c", it does not appear that anything within the offer is prejudicial to the interests <br /> <br />of the District. In other words, the conclusions previously stated as a result of <br /> <br />a"lalyzing the daily flOHS and operations in the minimum years, are not changed by the <br /> <br />o~fers made in behalf of the Cities of Denver and Colorado Springs. <br /> <br />Settlement Offer <br />by <br />City of Englewood <br /> <br />In regular statuatory water adjudication proceedings, the Moffat Tunnel Water and <br /> <br />Development Company obtained conditional decrees, dated 1932 and 1933, for direct flow <br /> <br />and storage of water on certain tributaries of the Fraser River. These rights have <br /> <br />subsequently been purChased by the City of Englewood with the intention of constructing <br /> <br />necessary works for diverting water of Meadow and Hurd Creeks through the Moffat Tunnel <br /> <br />eystem of the City and County of Denver. <br /> <br />Theoretically, there are two ways in Hhich the claims of the City of Englewood <br /> <br />might be detrimental to the Colorado-Big Thompson project operations. First, the <br /> <br />United States, as a part of its claim in Federal Court, contends for the development <br /> <br />of Ranch Creek Reservoir and the Strawberry and Meadow Creek diversion system as an <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />-11- <br /> <br />, <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.