WSP03383 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . . . . . . . County loo~(~_at waY~_Q.roundwater call restrictions ( By Atan Isbell PostsLaUWrilM The Garfield County commissioncn; Monday heard an attorney. for lhe Colorado River Water Cnn<:"~'aIlCY District BIal~tffeslate engineer's ~paSed policy for subdivision approval based on water rights. The issue arose aner State Engineer Jeris DanielsOD placed a call on the Green Mountain' R~ervoir near Krem- mling to r.elease water into the Colorado River. A call isa request lhal more water be released from a resenioir into a river LQ saUsey senior water rights. Next week at a public meeting, the commissioners wUl discuss with the. county attorney various ways they can < OC1561 approve subdivisions while the caB is in . effect. One allernative suggested by water distrlclattorney Kenneth Balcomb is to ignore the stale engineer's letter &~:!i:'e p. TJJe Iplt.er slated well per- mits received from ~l date ~robably woul,d not be issued if water rights were 'not owned and recommended the county nol approve subdivisions that have only junIorwaler rights. Hal Simpson, assistant stale engineer in charge of engineering, appeared before the commissioners at their request to explain Danielson's letter. Before he was through, Balcomb had challenged Danielson's authority to im- pose the edicts in theletler. Simpson said the letter was not "quite as serious as implied In the newspaper "cumulative effect" it would have on IGlenwoodPosl,JunC2J)." minimum stream nOw. u it was deemed The Post reported that the engineer's the weD or wells applied Cor would im~ letter meant no weD permit applications pact Grand'Valle~ or Shoshone Hydro- receiv~ a~~_ .'~~cPuwt!l""'Pls!H:slleniorri~,.the prov~ess water rights'were owned application would be denied. If. waw' or Ule parcel of land the water would be nghts were owned, a permit could, be used Cor W$S 3S acres or more. ThIS issued. However, iI .the rights were would include all Colorado River surface junior, the engjneer would recDn:Jrnend and ground walu and all tributaries up- against approval of the subdivision stream Cram Cameo in Grand Junction. because the wells couldbeshutoffduring The alternative is Co seek a water righl low-now periods to protect senior r1ghts. through water court.., a process that. All parcels greater than 35 e.cr~ are en- reportedly takeS approximately one yf!ar titled toa dcimeslic we~. . 'and$5,OOO in expenses. The solution for developers, according Simpson said the Idler meant to con- to Siutpson,'would be to purchaSe rights Vf!y that, if a subdivision was applied fa., to walet in reservoi':'5 such as Ruedi !to : the state enginf!el' would consider the that. any water taken,out by the,user could be replaced. or augmented, by releasmg reservoir water inlo the M\'er. He said he "slrongly urged" the com. missioners to heed the en.gineer's recom- mendations to make de'lelopers owning ---iHH~r.rili:.tn:ecl!' iUJ&!Jle1ltation, Of cour- se, the option of going towater eourt also would be open. . Baleomb C'Ont.ested the aUlhGMty of the engineer. to shut on wells and r~om- mend against subdivision approval when water from Green MOW1tain' Reservoir. never had been released 'Cully, as required in a call On the reservoir. Water In t.h.at reservoir is' designated for Western Slope domestic and irrigation use, Balcomb said, but- was held back .-hen ~it shoold have been lISCd for' bringing the Colorado River now up so :sen:or rights were satisned. This was lhe 'situation.for lhe latesl call on the Green MaUntaiD Reservoir, Balcomb argued, and was the qse in the last drought of 1917. According to Balcortlb,' the area (Ilimarily affected would be Garfield County, because the call was based on Colorado River nows between gates aL Dot.;;ero and Cameo. Flaws are measured at these points to detennlne whether the Shoshone B.ndGrand Valley rights are. ifl- fringed 0:1 h~ause nows had Callen. .