My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07373
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07373
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:26:59 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:18:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8142
Description
Trinidad Project
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
9/1/1996
Author
unknown
Title
Draft Review of Operating Principles and Project Operations Trinidad Lake Project Colorado
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.
/
135
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 />1, (,' .". <br />. itU~J <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />and the District deleted this requirement; however, the operating principles have not been <br /> <br />amended to delete land classification requirements. The District is presently irrigating lands other <br /> <br />than class I, 2 and 3 and therefore, technically violating the operating principles, (Appendix C.) <br /> <br />.--.-..----.--- <br /> <br />The operating principles required that certain direct flow rights be assigned to the District <br /> <br />for administration and operation. As reported in the 1988 report the District failed to contract for <br /> <br />administration of all of the direct flow rights listed in the operating principles and consequently it <br /> <br />........-- <br /> <br />~<:..L- <br />~ <br /> <br />was recommended that the total Project irrigated acreage be reduced fro <br /> <br /> <br />The Salas, Bums and Duncan, and Victor Flore ditches water rights were not totally contracted <br /> <br />for administration by the District. The 1988 report recommended that the eligible irrigable <br /> <br />acreage under these ditches be reduced by the same proportion as the proportion of the water <br /> <br />rights not contracted to the District for administration. While this methodology for reducing the <br /> <br /> <br />. eligible irrigable acreage may be technically the most appropriate, it does not consider the <br /> <br /> <br />ownership of the water rights and eligible lands and the contracts between the District and owners <br /> <br />of the water rights. An alternative method is to consider the ownership of the water rights and <br /> <br />eligible irrigable land and the District contracts which would require reducing the District irrigable <br />(QO <br />l,and by_218 ac~~_!()_12499 aq,,<s.s()1!11?~r~~_t()~28 a~es and 19439 acres respectively ct.L-A.9-- <br /> <br />recommended in the 1988 report (Appendix D.). At this time, the District has not contracted for ~... <br /> <br />administration of these water rights and they should be deleted from the operating principles and <br /> <br />"'7_~ <br /> <br />the total irrigated acreage reduced accordingly. <br /> <br />The irrigated acreage limitation is a critical element in protection of downstream water <br /> <br />rights. Since the irrigated acreage is a critical element for protection of downstream water rights, <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />it is important that the Project lands are identified, designated, and verifiable that such lands are W <br /> <br /> <br />19 ~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.