Laserfiche WebLink
RICHARD D. LAMM <br />Governor <br />• ' C r <br />* T • <br />i ,T_Z~,Gc.- rt <br />* 7810 <br />iii iiiiiiiniiiiii <br />C.J. KUIPER <br />State Engineer <br />DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street- Room 81B <br />Denver. Colorado 80203 <br />Administration (303) 839-3581 <br />Ground Water (303) 839-3587 <br />June 19, 1979 <br />MEMORANDUM <br /> <br />JUN 1 9 1979 <br />Nfili:ED LAND RECLP,IV'~raii0fd <br />Cole. Dept. cf ?dat~ral rr?ese~~rces <br />TO: HARRIS SHERMAN, SECRETARY, MINED LAND RECLAMATION <br />FROM: HAL D. SIMPSON, CHIEF, WATER MANAGEMENT BRANCH <br />FOR: DR. JERIS A. DANIELSON, DEPUTY STATE ENGINEER <br />SUBJECT: LOVELAND READY MIX CONCRETE, LARIMER COUNTY, APPLICATION <br />FOR MINING AND RECLAMATION PERMIT <br />As requested by your office, we have reviewed the application for a large <br />gravel mining operation in Loveland. Exhibit D states that 1700 gallons of <br />water per minute is utilized for gravel washing, and that additional water will <br />be needed for dust control on haul roads. Both of these uses of water, and <br />any other mining and sanitary uses, are considered to be beneficial. Exhibit <br />C states that at least part of this water is "...pumped from and returned to <br />the existing ponds...". Because the water in these ponds is ground water <br />flowing from the alluvium and because all beneficial uses of ground water, <br />including that from open-pit mines, require a well permit, the applicant must <br />obtain a well permit prior to Board approval of his application. <br />In Exhibit F, the applicant states that he will provide ", , .augmentation of an <br />estimated 0.51 cfs of water to offset evaporation losses. " The pond surfaces <br />to be created by the proposed operation would exceed 120 acres, with a conse- <br />quent evaporation loss exceeding 250 acre-feet per year. Water Court Case <br />W-7412 (Division 1), which the applicant uses as proof of water ownership, <br />states that the applicant's entire 2/3 share of Priority No. 9 of Rist and Goss <br />Ditch "...shall not exceed a total diversion of 370 acre-feet of water or such <br />lesser amount as may result in 171 acre-feet of consumptive use" (page 10, <br />part 3.E. (1)). Thus, it appears that the 4.27 cfs is not sufficient to replace <br />the 250 acre-feet of evaporation losses nor obviously is the 0.51 cfs offered. <br />However, the 4.27 cfs has consumed 171 acre-feet in the irrigation season <br />(April I -October 31) when water demand is the greatest. The evaporation from <br />the 120 surface acres during the irrigation season will probably be around 190 <br />