Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Tony Waldron <br />Mr. Jared Ebert <br />May 27, 2009 <br />Page 2 <br />property in the County. Thus, our consultant, Alan Howard of Brierley Associates, did not <br />include the McCanne Ditch on Exhibit C-1, and RMCC did not send a copy of the application to <br />the McCanne. A copy was provided to Mr. Spratlen and his lawyer immediately on their <br />request. <br />It is important to understand that the McCanne Ditch is a "salvage water right," meaning <br />that it does not divert water directly from a surface stream. Instead, water is "salvaged" from <br />irrigation runoff and groundwater seepage. In the vicinity of the property covered by RMCC's <br />amendment application, the principal "source" of water to the McCanne is runoff from <br />agricultural irrigation by Petrocco Farms to the east of Brighton Road and on the Reinoehl <br />property under an agreement between RMCC and Petrocco Farms. The Reinoehl property is <br />included in our amendment application (see the attached map). Both the Petrocco Farms and <br />the Reinoehl property are up-gradient from the McCanne Ditch, which captures Petrocco's <br />irrigation runoff either in collection ditches or in groundwater as it migrates towards the South <br />Platte River. <br />Mr. Spratlen's letter incorrectly states that RMCC's reclamation of the amendment <br />property will be "sealed water storage on both the east and west sides of the McCanne Ditch." A <br />slurry wall will be constructed only on the west (down gradient) side of the McCanne Ditch. The <br />east side of the McCanne Ditch will be backfilled. It is certainly true that the backfilled material <br />will not transmit groundwater as well as the sand and gravel currently in place. The difference <br />in transmissivity, however, does not reduce the amount of water available to the McCanne <br />Ditch, but only how water will be received by the McCanne Ditch. There is no change to the <br />hydrologic balance. <br />Significantly, runoff from Petrocco's irrigation will still reach the McCanne Ditch through a <br />collection ditch on the south and west boundary lines of the Arends property. Third Creek also <br />runs into the McCanne Ditch and will be undisturbed by mining under the amended application. <br />RMCC has no obligation to the McCanne Ditch to continue irrigating the Reinoehl property or to <br />maintain the sand and gravel in place beneath it as a means of transmitting runoff water from <br />Petrocco's irrigation east of Brighton Road to the McCanne Ditch. These facts were plainly <br />recognized by Mr. Spratlen when he sold RMCC to Boral for consideration that included the <br />right to mine sand and gravel from the Reinoehl property. <br />None of the agreements between RMCC and the McCanne obligate RMCC to provided <br />surface water or groundwater to the McCanne Ditch. The 1987 agreement touted by Mr. <br />Spratlen in his letter states that "[m]aintenance of water elevation in the three lakes is essential <br />to maintaining the flow of water in the McCanne Ditch." The "three lakes" referred to in this <br />agreement, however, are Cells 1, 2 and 3 at the Bromley Lakes property, which Brighton now <br />calls the Kenneth Mitchell Lakes (see the map attached hereto, which is an exhibit to the 1987 <br />agreement that Mr. Spratlen did not provide to you). Mr. Spratlen effectively undid this provision <br />of the 1987 agreement in 1995 when, as the owner of RMCC, he changed the reclamation of <br />Cells 1, 2 and 3 to allow them to be slurry-walled in connection with RMCC's agreement to <br />provide lined water storage to Brighton.