PERMFILE119981 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

West Elk Mine • relevant Dry Fork acreage covered by the augmentation plan. Therefore, the current augmentation plan will provide much more than adequate protection from senior water rights in the Dry Fork and Minnesota Creek basins. An important consideration relative to North Fork depletions is that, due to the regional dip of the bedding planes, inflows from streams, springs, and/or groundwater which enters the mine workings from the Dry Fork watershed could ultimately be dischazged into the North Fork, rather than the Dry Fork. The 1981 Minnesota Creek Protection Plan (Exhibit 58) requires MCC to return any waters from the Dry Fork that enter the mine workings back to the basin. Due to the conservative nature of the water augmentation plan (Exhibit 52), the potential loss of these waters from the Dry Fork basin is of no consequence to downstream vested water rights as they aze fully protected. Sylvester Gulch Engineering analysis indicate that there is a small probability that the mining in the Apache Rocks and Box Canyon permit revision azeas will deplete Sylvester Gulch flows (see Section 2.05.6 (3)(b)(iii & viii), Surface Water Quantity Effects. There are three decreed water diversion systems in the Sylvester Gulch drainage (Table 44). All of these rights aze owned and controlled by MCC. MCC realizes that there may be injury to these rights and will accept that possibility and does not plan to augment them within the Sylvester Gulch basin. However, depletions that may occur to Sylvester Gulch flow could affect senior North Fork water rights if a call for junior Sylvester Gulch water rights is made. (See North Fork Gunnison River below). Call records for the North Fork are • presented later in this section. As discussed below, MCC has a significant North Fork water rights portfolio that is available to cover Sylvester Gulch depletions, if necessary (Table 45). North Fork Gunnison River Though unlikely, subsidence may potentially reduce North Fork flows due to disruption of streamflows, springs, and groundwater, each of which aze discussed below. Table 44 S Ivester Gulch Water Ri hts Name of Right Appropriation Adjudication Case District Decreed (Structure) Date Date Amount (1) No. Priority No. Use (2) WalterGallob 06/01/1908 08/16/1936 0.75 3503 J-126 I absolute Chipmunk 06/10/1917 05/28/1937 0.9 2563 H-109 Ditch absolute I 06/01/1937 03/20/1954 0.57 5080 J-226 absolute Tony Bear 03/20/1954 06/01/1937 0.43 5080 J-226 M,D Pipeline absolute Notes: (1) MCC owns 100 percent of each decree. 2 D =Domestic I = Irri ation M = Minin 1. Streamflow -Normally, the limited natural runoff from this azea (estimated at 200 acrefeet per square mile per yeaz for water rights purposes) does not reach the North Fork except during high 1.05-177 Revised November 2004 PRIO