The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20030742.tiff rig« �, 5�. , , ,,, ..,:,: ,, ,...., .., .. , .. , „.,.„...„,,,,), County -i',4 143'.:' fas• T • , , ,. Profiles .., -i ,, 4 i { 2003 ,,,...$, / � , gym. _ +,3 ; .. .„ , .. • P• F f'rg.. .F'h '' a ,r MS i p i span`�vlY'R:s�'xTna-R�4flA'r�^i�v�N.n'R i f.,}' t 6 �M1 N x a 711 ANIr N:s74 a ft . . A ', s-- K 44r R. r jam. ,y kU'v "�*g��` n 'q' ` an" p "' 'kn4 ""'•'rr.1 I.- .4 r r 4th y r I` =L E x !p"; t .4: w • rm;a .may. c"`t' - "Y, itt}y, ® A Yt'�F M1 L{ ds if• a' "k' � COLORADO plIrrir jolt p ..,�, dry»,14; 4 ` , „:„..., : .. .„,...,‘„. .. „ „ `� `` ' DEPARTMENT Or A ,, ,, ,,, ,, ,, s. NATURAL 'fr.:-:;w ' - -�. �,.-tz r'„0,"...• RESOURCES Y Al.. ,J i G c, - O t() 2003-0742 STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Depa1313 Sherntman nf Street, Reso 71es 1313 Sherman Room J18 Denver,Colorado 80203 Phone: (303)866-3311 TDD: (303)866-3543 DEPARTMENT OF Fax:(303)866-2115 P-1 VI'1 T1 A 7 RESOURCES SDi�L1 Bill Owens Governor Greg E.Watcher Executive Director March 12, 2003 • Dear County Commissioners: I am pleased to forward to you a copy of the 2003 County Profiles for the Colorado Department of Natural Resources (DNR). These profiles highlight DNR activities in each county, key resource issues, and a contact for each DNR agency in those counties. A complete set of counties and maps which include water basin information and State Land Board properties may be useful to you. I hope you find this information useful. Do not hesitate to contact me, Mary Marchun, Assistant Director for Legislative Affairs, or Frank McNulty, Legislative Director for Division of Widlife. Sincerely, Star) Greg E. Walcher, Executive Director Board of Land Commissioners•Division of Minerals&Geology/Geological Survey Oil&Gas Conservation Commission•Colorado State Parks•Division of Forestry Water Conservation Board•Division of Water Resources•Division of Wildlife STATE OF COLORADO OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 718 Co lorado Coll orradoo 80 80203 Phone: (303)866-3311 TDD: (303)866-3543 DEPARTMENT OF Fax: (303)866-2115 NATURAL RESOURCES Bill Owens Governor Greg E.Walther THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES Executive Dire or The Colorado Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for the management of Colorado lands, water, and wildlife. The mission of the DNR is to conserve, enhance, and better develop Colorado's natural resources for the enjoyment and benefit of all Coloradans — and visitors to Colorado — now and in the future. The DNR has eight different divisions under its purview, with 13 publicly appointed boards and commissions to guide policy decisions. The eight divisions within the DNR are: the Division of Forestry; the State Land Board; the Division of Minerals and Geology; the Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation; the Division of Water Resources/State Engineer's Office; the Water Conversation Board; the Division of Wildlife; and the Colorado Oil and Gas Conversation Commission. The DNR is one of the most decentralized agencies in Colorado State government. Department of Natural Resources employees are based in 55 of Colorado's 64 counties. Although the DNR reaches throughout the state, it actually represents a very small portion of the state General Fund dollars — less than one percent —with the majority of the DNR budget coming from fee, license, and property revenues as well as lottery and federal funds. We are pleased to forward to you the 2003 County Profiles for the Colorado Department of Natural Resources. The County Profiles document highlights DNR activities in each county, including maps, key resources issues, and contact information for each division. Greg E. Walcher Executive Director Colorado Department of Natural Resources 1313 Sherman Street, Room 718 Denver, Colorado 80203 303-866-3311 www.dnr.state.co.us Board of Land Commissioners•Division of Minerals&Geology/Geological Survey Oil&Gas Conservation Commission•Colorado State Parks•Division of Forestry Water Conservation Board•Division of Water Resources•Division of Wildlife COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW Department Role and Mission The Colorado Department of Natural Resources (DNR) is responsible for the management of the water, land, wildlife, minerals/energy/geology, and outdoor recreation resources of the state. Its mission is to develop, preserve and enhance Colorado's natural resources for the benefit and enjoyment of current and future citizens and visitors. Description The DNR consists of eight divisions. Collectively, they carry out the DNR's responsibilities for natural resources management, which includes use or access to some resources, promotion of the development of select resources, and the protection or preservation of other resources. The divisions are: • Division of Forestry; • State Land Board; • Division of Minerals and Geology; • Division of Parks and Outdoor Recreation; • Division of Water Resources/State Engineer's Office; • Water Conversation Board; • Division of Wildlife; and • Colorado Oil and Gas Conversation Commission. Most of the divisions have boards and/or commissions that develop regulations and exercise other powers. Some specific programs have advisory boards. Collectively, there are 13 boards, commissions and advisory boards that assist the DNR. Each division has a director who reports to the executive director of the DNR and, in some cases, receives advice or policy direction from a board or commission. These divisions have offices or employees located throughout Colorado, with over 60 percent of the DNR's employees located outside the metropolitan Denver area. The DNR has employees in 55 of the 64 counties in the State. The Governor appoints the executive director. The Executive Director's Office develops policy on matters that overlap divisional responsibilities, provides comments on federal programs and legislation affecting Colorado, advises the Governor on natural resources issues, and coordinates the legislative activities of the DNR. The office also provides budget and planning coordination, accounting, financial management support, human resources services, information technology services, public information and environmental education coordination, and other services to the divisions. Department Overview www.dnr.state.co.us Vision Statement The DNR must be aware of and responsive to several fundamental realities in the management of natural resources in the new century. The challenges, trends, needs and problems most critical to the successful accomplishment of its mission include: • Public values and expectations in natural resources management; • Increasing competition for limited resources; • Large federal ownership of land resources in the state; • Local, state, regional and international influence on the economy and the environment; • Increased interest, involvement, and need for technical services by local governments in land use and resource management activities; • The growing need to educate and communicate with the public on key resource issues; • Public participation in resource management decisions; • The need for more public/private partnerships and volunteers; • The growing conflict between private rights, public access and off-site impacts related to resource development, use and protection; • Maximizing the use of information technology resources and electronic government application to reach the DNR's constituents and to enhance the productivity of its employees; and • Protecting the state's wildlife from threats of disease that could dramatically impact the health of our terrestrial and aquatic wildlife. The diversity of issues involving the DNR, coupled with globalization of our economy, results in our customers potentially being any person, citizen or visitor with an interest in the State of Colorado. The DNR intends for its customers to experience an organization that: • Employs staff who feel pride in their individual and collective accomplishments; • Maintains a national reputation as a leader in natural resources management; • Makes wise decisions about natural resources management—their value, use, protection and enhancement; • Insists on open, collaborative and fair process for resolving resource issues and disputes; • Encourages partnership with private enterprise, interest groups and volunteers in helping the DNR carry out its mission and programs; • Operates efficiently and uses its fiscal and human resources wisely in responding to the needs of Colorado taxpayers; • Communicates effectively with its varied natural resources constituencies; • Delivers the highest quality education and information programs to strengthen the public's sense of stewardship for Colorado's natural resources; Department Overview www.dnr.state.co.us • Attracts a highly capable and diverse group of young people into natural resources careers; and • Uses the latest Internet and e-Government technologies to enhance the DNR's outreach to its customers. Strategic Planning Principles In the service of its mission, the DNR uses six strategic principles to guide its planning activities. 1. Leadership. The DNR will anticipate natural resource opportunities and challenges and lead efforts to develop an integrated approach to capture those opportunities and meet those challenges. 2. Collaboration. The DNR will seek broad public participation in achieving its mission through open, accessible and collaborative processes, which include the following: • Facilitating and supporting efforts to define and implement long-term visions for the future, taking into consideration geographic, topographic and ecological boundaries; and • Strengthening relationships and developing partnership with and among the general public, community leaders, and constituent and government agencies, based upon encouraging collaborative efforts to respect local visions, values, traditions, and cultures. 3. Stewardship. The DNR is committed to stewardship practices that recognize that natural resources must be properly managed to sustain our quality of life. The DNR will solicit views and utilize the expertise of other federal, state and local agencies, as well as land owners, water users and community leaders, recognizing that economic development must be sustainable and must respect complex ecological functions that transcend jurisdictional boundaries. Resources management decisions will: • Integrate all information from relevant disciplines; • Sustain the health and viability of both the natural environment and the economy; and • Acknowledge the values of protection and responsible use of Colorado's natural resources. 4. Science and Information. The DNR will strive to obtain and use complete and credible information to guide policy development and decision making. 5. Communications. The DNR will communicate effectively with the public and provide leadership in natural resources education. Department Overview www.dnr.state.co.us 6. Effective Management. The DNR will exemplify efficient, effective, responsive and accountable government by: • Ensuring that DNR expenditures are consistent with division mission and legal directives; • Maximizing organizational productivity by motivating employees through career development opportunities and recognition of accomplishments; • Striving for a workforce and programs that reflect the diversity of the public we serve; • Engaging all our employees in the use of quality management tools to continuously and proactively improve the quality of our services to our customers; and • Evaluating systems, organizational structures and processes on regular basis to maximize the efficient delivery of service and institute change when appropriate. Department Overview www.dnr.state.co.us COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION MISSION STATEMENTS State Forest Service • Achieve stewardship of Colorado's environment through forestry outreach and service. • Provide for natural resource protection, restoration and rehabilitation in mountains, plains, and urban settings from damaging effects of fire, insects, disease, wind, water, and people. • Improve Colorado's renewable natural resource base for values the public regards as important, while being sensitive to future needs. • Achieve public understanding of forestry's role and value in a healthy environment. State Land Board To effectively manage the trust assets for the beneficiaries by: • Producing a reasonable and consistent income over time; • Protecting and enhancing long term production and values through sound stewardship; and • Diversifying and strengthening the portfolio. Division of Minerals and Geology The Mined Land Reclamation Board and Division of Minerals and Geology are responsible for ensuring that mined lands are returned to beneficial use after mining is completed, and that human health and the environment are protected during mining and reclamation. • Colorado Geological Survey To serve and inform the people of Colorado by providing sound geologic information and evaluation, and to educate the public about the important role of earth sciences in everyday life in Colorado. Colorado State Parks To provide a spectrum of safe, quality outdoor recreation experiences for our visitors, while effectively managing the natural resources under our authority. Division of Water Resources To provide competent and dependable distribution of water in accordance with statutes, decrees and interstate compacts: • To ensure public safety through safe dams and properly permitted and constructed water wells; • To maintain and provide accurate and timely information concerning water; • To promote stewardship of all human, fiscal and natural resources; Division Mission Statements www.dnr.state.co.us • To serve the public through the generation of creative solutions to problems; • To help the public understand complex water issues; • To promote stability in the use of the state's limited water resources; • To apply modern technology to its greatest advantage. Colorado Water Conservation Board To conserve, develop, protect and manage Colorado's water for present and future generations. Colorado Division of Wildlife It is the policy of the State of Colorado that the wildlife and their environment are to be protected, preserved, enhanced, and managed for the use, benefit, and enjoyment of the people of this state and its visitors. It is further declared to be the policy of this state that there shall be provided a comprehensive program designed to offer the greatest possible variety of wildlife-related recreational opportunity to the people of this state and its visitors and that, to carry out such a program, there shall be a continuous operation of planning, acquisition, and development of wildlife habitats and facilities for wildlife-related opportunities. Oil and Gas Conservation Commission To promote the responsible development of Colorado's oil and gas natural resources. Division Mission Statements www.dnr.state.co.us COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES DIVISION CONTACT INFORMATION Division Directors Jim Hubbard, Director Hal Simpson, State Engineer State Forest Service Division of Water Resources Colorado State University 1313 Sherman Street, Room 818 203 Forestry Building Denver, CO 80203 Ft. Collins, CO 80523 Phone: (303)866-3581 Phone: (970)491-7293 Fax: (303)866-3589 Fax: (970)491-7736 http://water.state.co.us/ http://forestry.state.co.us/ Chris Castillian, Director Rod Kuharich, Director State Land Board Colorado Water Conservation Board 1313 Sherman Street, Room 621 1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 Denver, CO 80203 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303)866-3454 Phone: (303) 866-3441 Fax: (303) 866-3152 Fax: (303) 866-4474 http://trustlands.state.co.us/ http://cwcb.state.co.us/ Ron Cattany, Director Russell George, Director Minerals and Geology Colorado Division of Wildlife 1313 Sherman Street, Room 215 6060 Broadway Denver, CO 80203 Denver, CO 80216 Phone: (303) 866-3567 Phone: (303)291-7208 Fax: (303)832-8106 Fax: (303)291-7105 http://mining.state.co.us/ http://wildlife.state.co.us/ Lyle Laverty, Director Rich Griebling, Director Colorado State Parks Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 1313 Sherman Street, Room 618 1120 Lincoln Street, Room 801 Denver, CO 80203 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303) 866-3437 Phone: (303) 894-2100 Fax: (303) 866-3206 Fax: (303) 894-2109 http://parks.state.co.us/home/ http://oil-gas.state.co.us/ Legislative Contacts Mary Marchun, Assistant Director, Frank McNulty, Legislative Liaison Legislative Affairs Division of Wildlife Department of Natural Resources 6060 Broadway 1313 Sherman Street, Room 718 Denver, CO 80206 Denver, CO 80203 Phone: (303) 291-7272 Phone: (303) 866-4895 Fax: (303)291-7105 Fax: (303) 866-2115 http://www.dnr.state.co.us/ http://www.dnr.state.co.us/ r Division Contact Information www.dnr.state.co.us COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ORGANIZATIONAL CHART Governor Bill Owens Executive Director Greg Welcher Division of Parks& State Forest Service Outdoor Recreation Jim Hubbard Lyle Laverty State Land Board Division of Wildlife Chris Castilian Russell George Division of Minerals&Geology Ron Cattany Water Conservation Board Rod Kuharich I Geological Survey Division of Water Resources Oil&Gas Conservation Commission _ State Engineer Rich Griebling Hal Simpson tcptarkber 202 Organizational Chart www.dnr.state.co.us ) ) ) Colorado State Forest Service District Offices I I 1.O,_.91 ur..wrwr 11 .+n_ nu ""'l''` Fort Collins i et,m, r Steamb>at 1 I E - r� Bou er fort M* gan kr RC UAW% Granby _s_ecra rte,.-.- _ 1xw xnr_-rxx+ i nxti CA .'UAW . 114-Er.a F.Wse F Ww:. GMCArairYur_E! ranktown I i ivb-rosq I +ar,,,IPtrV Grand Junction FrwPr S.TAW )LANE ,.. Y A _ Woodland Bark , i sec'srPAPA I ter IA I I rtas Et.ate. -J xun(EWE I,.. . CSAFFIT ! P GUNres,V _ .._....... Montrose . Salida * Gunnison ,,,m * Canon City :AI 011 I -- I SAGu.Ye£ CLKTFP -...-..m. .stn WW1La Jutirta :vr wmlkseec t Wt.wF Wi .; NSGA, -1 _ I arG.tlSi@ I ALUh_A I * * La a a wrEgi NM Durango ---------------- n:am t.A,Ar&AW 6.4-4L9, x5iA ,�9St1 LA December 2001 Colorado State Forest Service 2003 County Profiles A ' L . SEDCWICK `• 4.'� ROUTI + • t. „ LARIMER M WELD 'v= h, E`we I - t. MOFFAT • *k.:a �w '**yy JACKSON a Pf r =� LOCAN PHILLIPS ' Y f � •, 4° kga'tIkti A GRAND BOULDER • rQ% $ r 'x ' + 4 'tLe J P• RIO BLANCO ` S a it .' ,:t::: yy` ..et,i +. 6�, CILFIN BROOMFIc .•z'" l$5 �Q.�. , ,I. CI GARFIELD CLEAR O �.' .VER E *w° t' PUMA ` ,A, s" EAGLE w'EEK kiwiAH( WASHIIQCION I ELBERT KIT CARSONL DOUGLAS PARK +* I. g S 8 r ME SA DELTA EL PASO _� ' ,a7„, CUNNISON "ELLER CHEYENNE $ t r CBAPFE: e� L_� LINCOLN 1,r�9_ 4 . # k ki MONTROSE _ FREMONT a L. KIOWd' `� « 414 ' *URA CROWLEY �. :-«, .� PUEBLO ay„ y y: a. I NSDALE SA CUSIER a P$,;OWERS4 5ABMICUEL r BENT p' 1 DOLORES INPRAL HUERFANO OTERO L + , 4y RIO GRANDE %LAMOSA S` ' LA PLATA ,+ i LASANIMAS , -. MONTE ZUMA qq ARCHULE SA r itt BACA 'tf: E CONEJOS COSTILLA t "E°i . i caoec,oe RmNem.mR * % ACTIVE°ILC}B VASL LOCATION INICTWE0 ILKOLSI WELL LOCATION Oil and Gas Conservation Commission 2003 County Profiles /010041/4. Parks by Senate District prim a pro State NM Ft Collins Metro LORYg14 ,E (STATE FORES- / BOYD LAKE i I JACKSON LAKE J/ 23 BARBOUR PO DS 17 ' 18 IS Ron T OA ELDORADO C YON BARR LAKE GOLDEN GATE CANYON v4 �-. Scale: 1:1,200,000 Parks by House District rot Celoroa State Parks Ft Collins Metro ✓ �� ^� �, I a^ ..e LORY 3 52 =STATE FORESBOYD KE I _ 51 1 JACKS•N LAKE 48 11># '.,.ARBOUR PONDS a m.,.° 10 ELDORADO CANYON -€14. BARR LAKE o gym, ary Sa GOLDEN GATE a"""`°"` CANYON �` Scale: 1:1,200,000 Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles ) t•. , tit Ai J • 3 VI07...../ • ' _.E' 12 w x ba�i i'x ( , ,oc., .` ... ' . u �* State Senate Districts in relation to Colorado State Land Board Ownership r <,. . bk 49 . ' _ . , 13 /1 , ro xi1 ' .'' • 56 �' i� 46 63' 5\:11/5 61, xs `'�'. , h R`a 59 ' ., State House Districts in relation to Colorado State Land Board Ownership mm-SS State Land Board 2003 County Profiles Parks by Senate District Cokttad)Slate Parka Denver Metro x •`. .<. 18 ELDORADO CANYON 17 BARR LAKE GOLDEN GATE, 19 7 33 •? CANYON 3 �__ L I 21 � 34 21 20 26� CHERRY CREEK 32 _CHAT,IELD • - 30 STAUNTON ROXB ROUGH 22 l4 Acre " CASTLEWOOD CANYON 3o-.1720"En,7 32 Din 4nfam.n 30 Peula Sande.? n.. Scale: 1:1,200,000 Parks by House District tosnco Stue Parks Denver Metro Lui;::v _... _ 48y._r .1 11 BARBO PONDS 10 ELDORADO CANYON 33 31 BARR LAKE 30 GOLDEN G TE 29 32 7 CANYO 27 �� F6 .•. 3'FJr� 8 4 22 1 '-3- RR CREEK 38 2 CHA 7 LD3944 STAU TON ROXBOROU GH 7 'i.e. v9: 3. Lob CASTLEWOOD CANYONne May Tocinam Scale: 1:1,200,000 Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles Parks by Senate District Co clap Slate Parts Colorado Springs Metro SPINNEY MOUNTAIN ••r' la 9 �! 10 E ELEVEN MILE MUELLER ..�..- �, - �C NNE MOUNTAN -... ARKANSAS 12 / HEADWATERS LAKE PUEBLO J / Perk Bounds,e. Stele Senate Cob ado Sp rigs / 6 - are,-rep's / 9 .Doug Lembo 10 -RonMay 11 -Ed Jones -— 12-Andy MCElhanY Scale: 1:1,800,000 --� Parks by House District [blPub Colorado Springs Metro : 1 Ci4 1 SPIN EY MOUNTAIN 20 ELEVEN MIL 1s MUELLER ` C YENNE MOUNTAIN - ARK NSAS ' 17 z , HEAD ATERS as / le Moo Bounder / Stale C Moose oloradonaa SP no, LAKE PUEBLO la-Devi Soh Mr.!e s.el cairn en 16 Ell 51.Mark�nem, 11-Mchsoe tM I0-Lyn"Ml tley ernt 20 LynnHolley 21-H errn I ing 46 Dorothy Butcher l - Scale: 1:1,800,000 Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles ) c:(;u?ttA3x) I Parks By State Senate District .--Iii ir.I.�. _,_,�_ NiIU AL - #u:srurc rs STEAMBOAT/ • 11413tH* PEARL ♦♦ STAT FOREST ♦PI+ NIC ROCK N TH . 15 RY ,�3 ERL.IN.G ;�11111s::; 8 YAM€ - t:'..,. D JACKS ♦ S AGECOACft • BAIL�'!�,i�! 1 16 ELDORAD '• _ 'luau RIFLES GAP! ♦ t �r /� 25 y .er sq.irat#tort FALLS f` ' G r DEN CA. £ 4 Ird�nr;s:. • HARVE G. , ,�� BONNY •f, tr;rtSca • VAN ° ' .'.:,..m< 7. . t r fi;..r s zc wK __ ♦ HIGHLIN � A TON i `°`%" I t .... . ., Grp=: �°A / V ROXBO %' G A r'.at:;._�s�t. ��; ---N ,-BoLOR ♦ ";tl<:x: s.g 4 .,...711)4:k : ASTLEWQO — �p 1a . .; 3r:.. 7 RIB! R NNE: ELEV ' 10 ,n„t,:,€,, PAONIA A 1gMi y . SW ITZER faral9r:.as:o�, MUELLER EYENNE MTN C AWFORD ARKAN x S State Senate Districts 'r > .... • 1-Mark Hillman _ HEAD! 'TERS ri,�*�<` 2-Kester RIDGEWAY CrumEs"} 3-AbelTapia A 5 d-Ken Chlouber � ' 5-Lou Entz ;"h €,u:a v MJ {,t,r,� t.i3s ;tlio JOHN MARTIN A sa 6-Jim Is gar SAN LUIS EP.,.. jis;'f;+'r s A LONE MESA S LAKES - ''`..3. Rack Taylor Eel'; 7- h##ac# rvim,f• a1 10-Ron May A LATHRQP '1 13-Dave Owen ♦ 15-Steve Johnson MANGOS 6 ti₹ "°,-,m.t tr +rhrfga:<£ .' 16-Joan Fitz-Gerald ... 23-Ken • g:: • s�,.,.31#s.h1; ? 25-Stephanie i r-4c4E`zrr'a:!€13.:5 i.. k., .>w AT diu14..;:.i cG::tazg ,:, .. .. • �TRINtI �I>J 27-John Andrews NAVAJO ^a'Isr,13 ♦ r I Metro Area Districts • (See Detailed Maps) • Scale: 1 :2,800,000 Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles Parks By State House District Colorado Slate Parks Calara Doti N.N1 I,RAI. !,t s fru:PS STEAMBOAT! 65 ii.j PEARL ` STAT" FOREST PP''►NIC ROCK e `:;: N T H :.:: ::₹ LORY . D ERLING 57 YAtv�13A' . .. , 49 , AJACKS STAGECOACH kf RIFLES GAP/ ELDO A[ M 4�� ,� i. R LAKE :�c" GOLD • ' .r, i' � FALLS` f"r BONNY r - �� ti '� REEK A H C .'GHL.INFP` 56A TON 2 ls �+('Tlwo LLB b' 55 �` �' ROXBsReLG '\ ,� 3h .. • i. ;,;t'if'f ';.e., 60 4§, ,., ASTL lIU` OR D'. y _ INNEY ELEV: 4 19 /10 State House Districts 3= PAONIA • 13-Tom Plant {.g E„ MUELLER ; HEYEN E MTN• 1s-RichardDecken 4.gIn3v.?St • 4O Debb e25-John Vitwer 54 I�!_ER C AWFORD ._.. 45-Tom Wiens Stafford 58 A ANSAS KI;,,, 47-Lane McFadyen Ht+' WATERS 49-Kevin Lundberg RIOGEWAY * 61 PU BL.O “,vi illy, 47 55-Matt Smith • + 55-Gayle Berry • ". e";'-Sn.L>a: 56-Carl Miller .r'₹(Iligif7 Ouray eEa53�f Hint t]"₹ 62 "'"`' JOHN MARTIN 57-al White SAN I IS 58-Ray Rose /�' "' SA LAK S 59-Mark Larson AS 7 vT@•9 L.UNE L.A I'S (3tgag Y5�?ff1. ,:S:r3t,.c₹,fi i i rasa 3 >:: °. 60-Lola Spradley A <LATHROP 61 -Gregg Rippy • 62-John Salazar MAN ^ri 59 64 63-Greg Brophy y 64-Brad Young £•3;,. ..a P1,11a ]y,�4 y. r,:333131 d �, - . 66-Diane Hoppe 1.0r>,. s . Metro House Districts •NAVAJO NITRINIDA.D L` (see detailed maps) Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles t ) ) ) ) COLORADO COUNTIES -L.\ sEDGwICK LOGAN MOFFAT r ROUTT JACKSON LARIMER WELD — PHILLIPS MORGAN GRAND BOULDER �J RIO BIANCU _ Fit-- RRooMNFLEs — YUMA Carts SS"" ADAMS J WASHINGTON cLFAR CRFFK DENVER GARFIELD EAGLE SUMMI ARAPAH OE EFILEEOH il PITKIN r/ OUG LAS ELBERT LAKE (L f I KIT[ARSON _ PARK MESA bEL7A TELLER LINCOLN ELPAso CHEYENNE GUNNISON CHAFFEE L__._ - MONTROSE \ nC FREMONT KIOWA CROWLEY _ \ou RAY SAGUACHE PUEBLO OUSTER SAN MIGUEL � FC, HINSDALE t-/ Y OTERO RENT PROW ERS DOLORES 5a `_ R JUAN µINFRA HUERFANO\ rJ)/( RIO GRANDE ALAMOSA/ MONTEZUMA / LA PLATA 1 COSTILLA LAS ANIMAS BA G el ARCHULETA \ CONEIOs Map Coalpllatfon,Colorado DIVlllon of Lod Ciovem nisi,2001 2003 County Profiles DioradoStlearks Parks By Congressional District R g N�,,.]�,I. STEAMBOAT!, it w., „s,: ...,.-,,, --. �• iuv i.srs -.� eg ft Er..;. PEARL, A ' STAT FOREST PANIC ROCK • �' • a#a Nf TH . ,€asitstnt • L. RY ` ERLING 3 ....,sv YAI41PA `-0YD °•,JACKS • S AGECOACH° AR ;<laztall 4 2 ELDORADO RIFLES GAP/ a........ :ARR LAKE ..... .lax€rlit t`x ES<'€53IE:oIi FALLS . ........ ....._ GOLDEN �A 4 i .. ••HARVE gj1R,,,. '0•' .. -.,, 1�, • €. E...V BONNY _... `" Iel.VAN ,. CR ,: is HlGNLIN �" A ,, ,• *• r gTFI E.a.... .. • �• ' VEGA: .: ROXB� 'OUG • 6 I,g.,,k; -, €.,t.,Iisan r CASTLEWO RIVER A SPINNE A ELEVEN ILE ... I ;.ONIA A €€kg: . - A roll ' MUELLER • HEYENNE. MTN SWEITZER �+p/� f iry,•,;Y? }y •�+../��+. ........: CRA'NFORD A ANSAS p„„•,3 ';. 4 HER . TERS PU BLO ctw.:4s:,: RIDGE AY 3 • • JOHN MARTIN ,<f<i3 A z44 P°`ytie! r iql.�.!•c! F'CS£rL:r: SAN LUIS • F.,..,. . :. K,:;:, •LONE MESA-: • ¢;}(Id•i€::' ........... . LAKES ;,<:;,a>-r„:n .: Congressional Districts • 3Air.A xIr . HROP Dec e MANGOS •...L; -2 a:r::::-"im 2-Mark Udall 3-Scott Mclnnls t.;> ,, s •,.il i 4•Marilyn Musgrove 5-Joel Hefley NAVAJO • I • TRINIDAD 6-TomTancredo A — t. 7-Bob Beauprez Scale: 1:2,800,000 Colorado State Parks 2003 County Profiles } ) COLORADO HISTORIC AVERAGE ANNUAL STREAM FLOWS (acre feet) 316,900 :ax, 119.900 4`- 421600 "" • pi • r _ - nq�' - 408,900 419=300 - ° 8. 364.500 \ 100,TD0 .° y A ea le }}43000 `°:.�; 7 - 10 O 1,6560ss aro° Ty � 928100 O ay ' a*; as 44 An;.',' 674 ,w,.•,. - O 337 ss e Y81=300 j 00 tijiP,. • H ss 4808.1.4%,41„,„;,‘1 32,280 a 487 Q7 aa,:` �{ s 500 577 s . ccc -0271,200 NORTH FORK. —^^^�i M 2 < .° ° 80UL0I 2%,800 REPU$UCAN 590,100 x1240 185 s s -St 3xp V n �`x sl t.1 O a atia r ; 419 +sf ay. SEARs t}C.P 13,980 "-Z!7600 AI 9 PP Y S '�1,_ ^" -- kJ H NO.fORK - � �.. U }29000 g `' Q 4 ' c 65.400 - - „° ti 68.700 61 .n Q CC 37.200 z. 'Q3' , 3 586200 s•e <-. 573 100 3 1898,000 s ''MO .° 592,900 68.100 : 2 _ O 'U .` a ..., w 725,408 3 c„ - 127,511P � 89=920 - W s 174.}00 TOMICHI .163,200 �1 4 3 1 ° �«^___„„ I "�Z 394,500 24,870 4.. 64800. ---659,800 HUERfANO i9,5oo" P QO 49,860 317 8n 'e� 9=708\ ,z" - - �d:act,37 750 2 MCELMO q, 301 II.... - - 32.40b 52b70,,,. 16 :k �_ r CONE • '31.8.400 a MANGOS .,.., S "k+ tbiti 4 274,100 X239 400 37,950 26.100 469.600 94,180 680,500 179.000 301,400 64400 TOTAL LEAVING COLORADO 10,726,000 of Prepared by the Hydrographic Branch(2000 Revison) OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER Historic averages obtained from USGS water-Data Report CO-99 COLORADO DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES PStRCONS 0Y-‘1194•4G9 Arkansas River Basin Facts , 44) fl ^..:olorado Water Conservation Board March 2002 \3 'o 7 r ° °ter 77 i a talee a Walden tsannq w t in ,S 1 l It 1 r; 7937 a..k« .GrWry 4 9� 'Dxiwr «y' ' .Glenwood '�° Grand sons aviington m« Bill Owens r 'inc°°n • Governor Gum so 5 1e i�itita xa � a � . Greg Welcher tPr `ig ° w„ ti DNR Executive Director «Durango c aEttigt•¢S JT-e. -•.4 "11K t , t'° °° ° __ c a'�.�x�- Rod Kuharich a ; .?+. ° ' =° " CWCB Director }vE'rv1eW " « ,�« : .-* _ '—"°*'"°' "' Harold Mickel „„ „- ,.,m... CWCB Member, The Arkansas River begins in the ° _R. • Arkansas River Basin central mountains near Leadville and flows south and east to Kansas. Fountain Creek Approximately one-quarter of the state is drained by the Arkansas River. Growth Principal tributaries include Fountain, Water Conservancy The basin is comprised of all or part of Tunpas and Grape Creeks; and St. Districts 19 counties.Between 1990 and 2000, the Charles, Huerfano,Apishapa,and population in this region increased by Purgatoixe Rivers. Arkaltad5 River 27 percent and now accounts for r North La Junta 19.5 percent of the total state population. rigation is the major water use in the Purgafoire River The graph below outlines populations for basin,with about 2.0 million acre-feet the portions of the counties that are in diverted for irrigation in 1998 out of .upper Arkansas Colorado UpperAfkansas the basin. A recent study by the South- total diversions of 3.7 million acre- eastern Colorado Water Conservancy feet. There is substantial reliance on District suggests that 173,000 acre-feet of groundwater in the basin for irrigation additional storage will be needed to uses. Recreational use is an economic support growth in the basin through mainstay in the headwater region,with 2040. some of the best fishing and river Arkansas River Basin Population by County rafting in the nation. 600 Total Basin Population a togs 82000 500 April now a04aaa July 2000 838,100 Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use v 400 Percent Growth. 27% ii: 1998 AF 1997 I.77•1')391 , O Irrigation , 1 (AF) g 300 '� � ` +e:�4' ■Storage 2,346,924 1.935.335 1 g e°a1«,e fie 1,346,924 1,147,941 ss OMunicipal .11 172,850 145,977 8200 o Industrial ■Commercial 146,272 145,526 . 2.053 251 100 fD Domestic 128 175 g¢ ■Stock 483 643 0 O Recreation 17 17 -' rs(1 x.{°^ ■Fish ecP eoc`o¢o ode,e es h4P t j e,ayo e,edec'eee edo0oc0"- `e ee" e r e rt �� 26,292 21,891 m r �s ®Augmentation 2,892 18,374 G o o F`e s'e `> ePc e`° a°r� `� DRecharge 2,638 2128 "a o Source:Colorado Department of Local Affairs Total 3,733,511 3,418,258 Source:Colorado Division of Water Resources, Division 2Annual Additional information about this river basin is Reports available at http://cwcb.state.co.us Major Storage Projects Major Water Rights Calls ,,x4 „-r,k A:T; Major water rights calls during the winter come from Reservoir Normal Storage John Martin Reservoir (1948),the Winter Water , (acre-feet) John Martin Reservoir 603,465" Storage Program (1910) and Pueblo Reservoir Pueblo Reservoir 357,678 (1962). During the irrigation season,priority Great Plains Reservoirs 265,552 calls generally originate from the senior Twin Lakes 141,000" irrigation rights,including the Colorado Canal Turquoise Reservoir 129,432 (1890), Fort Lyon Nos. 2 (1887) and 3 (1893), Trinidad Reservoir 119,877 Holbrook(1889),Catlin (1887),Highline (1890),Otero Adobe Creek Reservoir 71,000 (1890),Consolidated(1888),and Amity (1887).The Cuchara Valley Reservoir 40.E Fort Lyon Storage (1906)right may also call during the Lake Meredith 39,804 Horse Creek Reservoir 28,000 irrigation season. Clear Creek Reservoir 11,500 Mt. Elbert Forebay 11,530 The available capacity for exchange between water Lake Henry 9,500 rights diverting downstream from Pueblo to points St. Charles Reservoir No. 3 8,638 of diversion or storage upstream from Pueblo Holbrook Reservoir 4,600 (e.g.,Pueblo,Twin Lakes and Turquoise Reservoirs)is an Dewoose-Dye Reservoir 1,772 effective means of water resource management in the Brush Hollow Reservoir 3,933 Arkansas Basin. Mt. Pisgah Reservoir 2,471 Dye Reservoir 5,640 The Division 2 Engineer acts as the Operations Secretary Sources:Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam Safety to the Arkansas River Compact Administration. In this Database;'Colorado Water Conservation Board capacity,the Engineer is charged with conducting the operations of John Martin Reservoir during each Com- H yd ro l o g i ca I Variations pact year(November 1 -October 31) according to the -� John Martin Reservoir Operating Plan. This is an impor- Examples of annual and seasonal variations are shown below taut component in the operation and management of Gage Maximum Minimum Arkansas River Basin water resources. Recorded Recorded '' Flow(cis) Flow(cfs) Implementation of the Amended Groundwater Measure- Near Nepesta 6,930 (1994) 90 (1978) merit and Use Rules has resulted in nearly real-time Near Granada 3,330 (1987) 3(1990) administration of conjunctive use of groundwater and Source:U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports surface water in the basin. �j Dc Source.Colorado Water Conservation Board and Annual Discharge Division 2 Engineer's Office Arkansas River Near Granada,Colorado Stream and Lake Protection 140 ._.,,._...____.__. ___.__.__._ ._....._..___._., ......_..........,..._.._.w_.,,...___......__._._. ., There are 126 instream flow segments totaling approxi- Away'Armed Dixlrp 149,415 AF aAvy.Year 120 Aw nun Annie(Oedema 42.942 AF(1992) ■Mai.Yam { match'607 stream miles in this basin.There are also 85 04.03111111111 Annear Discharge: "2,'4'AF(1ear) QNN.Year lakes with decreed natural lake levels.These decreed S loo R water rights are held by the CWCB to"protect the e ao E natural environment to a reasonable degree." The It 60 decreed amount for each of these instream flow segments and natural lakes is based on the flow or 40 m m lake level required to maintain the water-dependent m R 20 natural environment. o Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Source:Colorado Water Conservation Board Source:U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports Arkansas River Basin Facts - 2 .-1 Major Imports into the Basin �� Name Recipient Diversions d` Stream acre-feet • 1* Boustead Tunnel Lake Fork Creek 53,971 :. ` T , 2 Twin Lakes Tunnel Lake Creek 46,930 ` 3 Homestake Tunnel Lake Fork Creek 24,5200 l ' AC ' It r. • F.p[ 4 Hoosier Tunnel Fountain Creek 9,330Ol , 5 Busk-Ivanhoe Tunnel Busk Creek 4,123 Y. 13. : • 6 Wurtz Ditch Tennessee Creek 2,070 7 Columbine Ditch Arkansas River 1,669 P. 8 Medano Ditch Huerfano River 834 Adi ita a,� � 9 Ewing Ditch Tennessee Creek 775 : 10 Larkspur Ditch Poncha Creek 66 (0 ,« ___ Source:Division 2 Annual Report(Water Year 1998) .sew k"' Ma ai Exports from the Basin `A.'''..."664:1 ....., ^w .&,wa y .�' "R�a 'e °•^^.° .. ^" ,r*v,:._.+r»,s.,. r-.:M wa., a,, ,..,,,,8,1',& Name Diversions Stanley Reservoir(Photo courtesy of Dan Clayton) (acre-feet) 11 Aurora Rocky Ford Ditch 8,250 Source:Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District and �. Division of Water Resources a Numbers in the above table correspond to numbers that Wet and Dry Periods accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). Continental Hoosier Tunnel exports from the Colorado Basin Every rear,Colorado experiences at least one to the Arkansas Basin through a portion of the South Platte 100-year flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's Basin. total flood losses to date have been documented to be S4.9 billion. The basin's most recent flood event was April 29-May 3, 1999.The estimated total historic damages for this basin are $1.3 billion to date. - Wo May June 1935 Dry Avg Wet Kiowa, Bijou, Fountain& June-July 1957 Monument Creeks Basin floods flood April 1999 June&Aug 1921 May 1955 June 1965 Fountain Creek Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods floods I I Upper Basin t',..'„,°,,,:t..i:,:°,,oziiii,,,,,,::1,-.% - —LE. 6 ., Lower Basin _ _ '.."`-iurce:Colorado Water Conservation Board;and McKee. Doesken,and Kleist. Historical Dry and Wet Periods in Colorado, Figures, Colorado Climate Inter,Colorado State University, 9999. Arkansas River Basin Facts - 3 Endangered Compact Facts ` Species Arkansas River Compact of 1948 The native greenback cutthroat trout The Compact apportions the waters of the Arkansas River between Colorado is the Colorado State Fish. It is (60%)and Kansas(40%)based on the opinion of the US.Supreme Court in federally listed as threatened but has Colorado v.Kansas,320 US.383 (1943). The Compact established the Arkansas been reintroduced into many streams River Compact Administration to prescribe procedures for Compact administra- and lakes. The Arkansas darter is a lion,including three representatives from Colorado(a water user from above federal candidate species for listing and below John Martin Reservoir and the Director of the under the Endangered Species Act Colorado Water Conservation Board),three Kansas representatives,and a and is listed as threatened by the federal representative. Colorado Division of Wildlife. Unique The 1980 Operating Principles provide for storage accounts in John Martin Reservoir and the release of water from those accounts for Colorado and Chara� . � �t C� Kansas water users. If the conservation pool in the reservoir is depleted, cteristics Colorado is required to administer water rights priorities in District 67 Erosion and channel instability in (downstream from John Martin). During such periods,Kansas is not lower reaches of Fountain Creek. entitled to water flowing into the reservoir. ;: ' An unusual groundwater mound ; exists at La Junta and is under ' Colorado and Kansas have litigated claims concerning Arkansas River water investigation, along with substan- since the early twentieth century. Supreme Court decrees establish principles of tial channel degradation. equitable apportionment of water between states. In 1995,Colorado was found 4 Development of water supplies to have depleted stateline flows in violation of the Compact. The states are now will be limited and complex due to :i litigating the nature and extent of the injury to Kansas and the method o€ the Compact allocation,interstate '' re.pac-ment by Colorado before a Supreme Court appointed Special Master. Iii -.... litigation,and salinity concerns. response to an order of the Special Master,the Colorado State Engineer 4 Litigation with Kansas over promulgated well administration rules to b `rattg Golora,slo into compliance with compact issues. it,:.the Compact 3+eS �',s,a`Aid` ' k'� }"�bita.x _.��P�::,�, ...�.L �` '.�. '�tta„�„R,a4" .'� �.k �� ....� iW:., ,._:.'�.: a a„T.:s Groundwater • Upper Basin Above Pueblo Reservoir Lower Basin--Below Pueblo Reservoir Alluvium Bedrock Aquifer Shallow Alluvium Bedrock Aquifer Aquifer Stream and glacial' Dry Union Formation up Width varies from 1 610 Up to 1,000 ft thick. Characteristics deposits --silt to large to 500 ft thick. Fractured miles; 30 to 200 ft thick. Sandstone formation in boulders granite --Sawatch and Designated groundwater the Ogallala (Northern Mosquito ranges; basins within the Arkan- and Southern High Plains) carbonate rock-- sas Basin include the The southern part of the Leadville Upper Black Squirrel and Denver Basin bedrock Big Sandy. aquifers provides water to Douglas, Ef Paso and Elbert counties. Primary Uses Domestic Domestic Agriculture Agriculture, domestic and municipal Yield Varies widely due to Varies widely: 10 to 4,000 gpm, 50 to 500 gpm range of materials: up to 10 to 200 gpm depending on location 500 gpm at Salida to Buena Vista reach Water Qualify Generally y potable, a few Generally potable, a few Degrades downstream Generallywery good local exceptions of local exceptions of from good in the upper natural and manmade natural and manmade portion of the reach to contamination contamination poor, only marginally useful for irrigation and stockwatering due to salinity Source. Colorado Department of Natural Resources Arkansas River Basin Facts - 4 Since ;_, the CWCB has provided over$11.7 million in ) Arkansas River Basin loan financing for 22 water projects in this basin. Projects receiving over$500.000 are shown on the basin map as a red triangle A. N W*E 5q� h a S 10 0 10 21 Files Ede' Vista 41 r � •,,... GI-Ck .YE_ INC_ t .....jt `PK TE LEE? I l�P \w�,.r la a NCOL. "",.. arson f Eaae AuN g 11'°R' +!7. ;:w t kan'squiver ellublal r. A 0‘, lj v ` ti �h wee •, �tt ® ice \ s /Aq 1+ ` _,- 1 Napes P P(.f. �� r A t� tryM " �►. r +� t y 0 PROW R Municipality 't-,. �' /. A CB Lin Construction Project NWaBasin Import into B Basin /"" Highway Nib y Major Stream or River + Designated How Fl Reach 'minim / Major ae r Reservoir Major lake in Reservoir Denver Basin Aquifer Aluvlal Aquifer Designated Ground Water Basin n i Icounty t�M AS ANIMA, f in CWCB Basin r J f AC;'. frr � f1 � (Arkansas River Basin Facts - 5 ,,, CU h,},c+p _Colorado River Mainstem Basin Facts � � Purr* f° Color' or .� .� i, .z e ons B :a�i:�. Rid i 0 , t,1 l. ... ado. ci.5a a„ 4u`ta. .f ._ .a Srk ti - i r.7.. s ; , Af�,. ..,..€.,`- 4 re Wel• n vGrohey rMarling Meeker ° 'l"r' S$�, r Bill Owens "Denver °"s ".' tka Governor eurnngaq a .riiiiii . ii .caor.m Greg Welcher springs ii Gunmaon : = DNR Executive Director Pueblo La Junta Alxmopa r Rod Kuharich .Dur„go CWCB Director . `" . � ,. Greg Hoskin CWCB Member, tw v ,Tt v t �.Ni ` — ".' ' Colorado River Basin The Colorado River accounts for 25 percent of the stream flow leaving Dillon Reservoir(Photo courtesy of Linda Strand) the state. Development of the basin $P' 1,a y G ��l i„h yield is limited by interstate compacts Major Water with other Colorado River Basin States. Organizations l'he basin is comprised of portions Between 450,000 and 600,000 acre-feet or all of ten counties in the western is diverted to Eastern Colorado Wa ster:nservatios District part of the state including small annually. Future development is Colorado River portions of Rio Blanco and Lake ."---limited to 120,000 acre-feet by the Counties; however, the majority of 15-Mile Reach Programmatic Biologi- Water Conservancy Districts the population is in the eight counties cal Opinion at the present time. Collbran Battlement Mesa listed in the bar graph below' Be- Ute Basalt West Divide Bluestone tween 1990 and 2000, the population Major tributaries include the Fraser, Sift Middle park in this region increased by 42 percent, Blue, Eagle and Roaring Fork Rivers. and now accounts for 5.5 percent of Large amounts of U.S. Bureau of Other Organizations the state's population. The graph Land Management and Forest Service Grand Valley Water Users Association below outlines populations for the lands are in this basin. Agriculture is Grand Valley Irrigation Company b portions of tine counties that are in the dominant water use, with diver- this basin. skins of approximately 2.2 million acre-feet for the irrigation of Colorado River Basin Population by County 300,000 acres. 120 100 Total Bite Population ®1900 ■2000 Aril 2000 234,500 000 104,100 Apr11 Surface Water Diversions in IAcre-feet by Use $ 80 Percent Growth a 42% 1998(AF) 1994(AF) g ®Irrigation 2,185,350 1,921,676 a 60 ■Storage 434,194 450,330 `o O Municipal 50,289 56,267 5 40 D Industrial 5,321 3,749 0 ■Commercial 2,293 131 a ®Domestic 15,315 9,050 20 III Stock 28,438 36,856 9 0 Recreation 3,398 6,131 0 III Fish 160,827 708,693 �a a c c a �a a ®Augmentation 0 280 4,a° G1ac Qa- 0,, °5° 4e aha p°° --,,,,_ 0Recharge 0 1 s 0 Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs Total 2,885,425 2,593,164 ^"^.e ..°^ a6- �, Additional information about this river basin is available at http://cwcb.state.co.us /cwcb.state.co.us Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources, Division 5 Annual Reports Major Storage Projects Major Water i s Calls What it Is: Cameo Irrigation Call (Totaling Reservoir Normal Storage 2,260 cfs with most pnorities from (acre-feet) 1912-1934 Grand Valle}-Irrigation Co. Granby Reservoir 539,800 priorities of 1882 and 1914) Dillon Reservoir 254,036 What it does: Provides water mostly for irrigation Green Mountain Reservoir 154,600 and power in the Grand Valley near Ruedi Reservoir 102,369 Grand)unction. Williams Fork Reservoir 90,640 When: From as early as April to as late as October Wolford Mountain Reservoir 66,000 in dni years. Homestake Reservoir 43,600 Vega Reservoir 33,800 What It IS: Public Service Company's Shoshone Shadow Mountain Reservoir 18,400 Hydropower Call Rifle Gap Reservoir 13,602 (1905, 1,250 cfs and 1940, 158 cts) Willow Creek Reservoir 10,600 What It does: Provides water to the Shoshone Power Jenny Creek Reservoir 9,591 Plant near Glenwood Springs. Grass Valley Reservoir 5,058 When: Often exercised during the winter,thereby Clinton Reservoir 4,372 limiting upstream supplies for municipalities, Eagle Park Reservoir 3,148 transbasin diversions and snowmaking. Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam , e Safety Database4. s �4y}!§:R .4. r. H r rological .N§' F )-5,- ,1 $ gam° ,, ./. c.,.r.ai-b..aes % tit ),,,) adr Examples of annual Colorado River flow variation are � x ' shown in the following table, and seasonal variations are ::;14.,.:':::. -° 4 shown in.the annual discharge graph. Gage Maximum Minimum Recorded Recorded .. . "? Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) At State Line 68,300 (1984) 960 (1956) At Cameo 38,000 (1984) 700 (1940) „.. . Itt At Dotsero 22,200 (1984) 350 (1944) Source. U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports a a`d t r t o�^$i 4.. e,"""',,^ t 3 a r2ii, ^�evti �'' area.--, i+..E Li ��),...,,, 1 Colorado River Near the Colorado-Utah State Line 5'. sao0o -- -.. amts i Average Annual Discharge: 4.638,000 AF M Avg Year 45000 - Minimum Annual Discharge: 1,852284 AF(1911) 2 40,000 - Maximum Annual Discharge 9,7/9,583 AF(1884) ■Max Yet 'r s new#v a'v •U 0Min Year P k 35.000 - KK. u 30.000 w� YS pp• S� ttq••a d 2. 25.000 ! a '41.1::?2'; �, f '21.000 - "Ss �� - .. & 15,000 - y+ r Y A ' F.el 15,000 -OJ I LA Ei I PY l ¢ I Fi+r^ a9 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Eagle River(Photo courtesy of Brian Blair) Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports Colorado River Basin Facts - 2 Major imports into the Basin None aY „9 .:bra . ..e: :: a,s' Name Diversions (acre-feet) 1* Adams Tunnel 207,488 2 Roberts Tunnel 64,330 3 Boustead Tunnel 60,931 4 Moffat Tunnel 48,994 5 Twin Lakes Tunnel 42,070 6 Homestake Tunnel 26,652 West Inlet to Grand Lake, Rocky Mountain National Park 7 Grand River Ditch 18,122 (Photo courtesy of Fred Wilson) 8 Continental Hoosier Tunnel' 9,551 9 Busk-Ivanhoe Tunnel 4,598 1,7 . erc.S and Lake r t rctijn 10 WurtzDitch 2,834 * Numbers in the above table correspond to numbers that There are 374 instream flow segments totaling ap- proximately 1,992 stream miles in the basin. There arc accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). also 142 lakes with decreed natural lake levels. These +Continental Hoosier Tunnel exports from the Colorado decreed water rights are held by the CWCB to Basin to the Arkansas Basin through a portion of the South protect the natural environment to a reasonable Platte Basin. degree." The decreed flow or lake level for each of Source: Division 5 1998 Annual Report, 10-year average these instream flow segments is based on the flow or lake level required to maintain the water-dependent ��,m . . natural environment. Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board "- s x y Every year, Colorado experiences at least one 100-year Green Mountain Reservoir(Photo courtesy of Theresa Stone) flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's total estimated flood losses to date are $4.9 billion. The basin's most June 1995 recent major flood event was May 21-26, 1984. The Upper estimated total historic damages for this basin are May-June 1984 Colorado River Colorado River at Grand and tributaries $109.5 million to date. June 17 1965 Junction floods I flood Blue River at June 1957 Breckenridge floods May 1993 Colorado River floods at Government - June 1983 Creek/Rifle Grand Junction and Roaring Colorado River at Creek at Rifle Dry Avg Wet Fork River floods Grand Junction floods floods d 66 o 6 6 5 g g- g 5 6 6 a 5 6 - 6H Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board Colorado River Basin Facts 3 Endangered Compact Facts Species Colorado River Compact of 1922 Allocates 7.5 million acre-feet(maf) of consumptive use annually to (1) the Under the Endangered Species Ac Upper Colorado River Basin (those parts of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, four Colorado River native fish Utah, and Wyoming above Lee Ferry, Arizona) and (2) the Lower Colorado species are listed as endangered: River Basin (those parts of Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah Colorado pikeminnow, humpback below Lee Ferry, Arizona). This Compact requires the Upper Colorado River chub,honyta 1,and razorback sucker. Basin to deliver an average of 75 maf to the Lower Basin during any consecutive Causes for the decline of these 10-year period. species may include alteration of stream flows by water projects, Rio Grande, Colorado and Tijuana Treaty of 1944 between the United States introduction of non-native species and Mexico and past efforts to remove the native Guarantees delivery of 1.5 maf of Colorado River water per year to Mexico. fish from the Colorado River. If there is not adequate surplus water to satisfy the obligation,the Upper and Lower In 1988, the States of Colorado, Utah Basins are to equally share the burden of reducing uses to make up any deficiencies. and Wyoming; water users; hydro- Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 power customers; environmental Allocates the Upper Basin consumptive use of water as follows: organizations;and federal agencies Arizona 50,000 acre-feet/year developed a program to recover Colorado 51.75 Jo these species while allowing water use Utah 23°!0 and development to continue. The Recovery Program for Endangered Wyoming 14O New Mexico 11.25,0 Fish of the Upper Colorado River Additionally,the State of Colorado may not deplete the flow in the Yampa River Basin is designed to achieve recovery by (1) improving flow conditions by below an aggregate of 5 maf over any 10-year period adding water to the river when - - needed by the fish, (2) improving and Depending upon the interpretation of the Compacts, other laws, and the amount of water in the river,Colorado's right to the consumptive use of water under the developing habitat, (3) reducing non Compacts may range from 3.079 maf to 3.855 maf per,year. Colorado currently native fish populations, and (4) devel- consumes an average of 23 maf per year with facilities in place capable of using up op rig native fish stocking programs. to 2.6 maf. Colorado's apportionment has not been divided among the various sub- Implementation of the Recovery basins within the state. The Yampa and La Plata River Basins have specific delivery program should allow Colorado to obligations under the Compacts. The allocation and administration of any surpluses fully develop its entitlement to water and shortages under the Compacts within Colorado remains open to discussion but under the Compacts. ultimately will be subject to determination and administration by the State Engineer04, Approximately 480,000 acre-feet of transmountain diversions is � # made to the South Platte and Arkansas River Basins from the Colorado 2 Mainstem on average each year. This far exceeds transmountain '� v diversions from any other area in the state. `' e4. l t There is less reliance on groundwater inir rigation, basin for rrigat on, � municipal and industrial water supply purposes than in the Rio Grande, `e :a.t Arkansas and South Platte River Basins. 4. The presence of four species of endangered fish and the resulting `r r-, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's Recovery Program have significant Columbine Lake (Photo courtesy of effects on water resources management and development. Sarah Reeves) Salinity issues could affect future development in the basin. F C�oloorado River Basin Facts - 4 Colorado River Mainstem Basin • Since 1971, the CWCB has provided more than $48.4 million in financing for 34 water projects in the basin. Projects receiving over $500,000 are shown on the map as a red triangle •. , t (, S1 r �t . i , , /\ l:::-...,-. : i f/l _ • Municipality `�' t�C114 A CWCB Loan Construction Project \ L�'1 i'- } .1i Water Export trcm Basin ., . Hi(jtway _/--- . Granby :�" ------Major Stream or River Instream Flow Reach Designated Flood Plain b Major Lake or Reservoir `7 RCounty c , , CWCB Basin 1� :. (;: dial - Neat, le ', fit+ a jtisEA f 7-_N....„....,,,,,..) . • • y . .,,,i 1.... . i j ,1.,,, 4. Si • arrCi C , =do iv ne:u, at L. e cxada R;7e� _......:� , r tIESA f � N Ffear> mer> __ N �� t,.>gii 1 unct1 n , W E 5 a o 1.M. ' • • aS (Colorado River Basin -Facts - w.......,.,.X1401...e.,w..e::...m. „..1.-...c_c 1......,... „g coNs,Gunnison River Basin Facts ° • f"° I~ ! °'� ” �i~? co ;oiora o Water Conservation Board March 2002 z) '- ' �' Walden "Sterling - `d Meekerekar 'Greeley Meeker - v sl e_.,e �..x �".e- ..:' "Glenwood "Denver Jrandon springs Burlington "° Bill Owens le Governor cdorado K r Springs t - i-r lattVkklIZ0A` ,- t t ;, r Greg Walcher �iebio , +%; , DNR Executive Director La Junta 3 f�. +' ""'e r Durango AlamOrSa ""3�". a i ., " - :.'"' ' *' ` ,. Rod Kuhanch �" ° ,, 4� CWCB Director . ` Keith Catlin The Gunnison Rivet Basin,encom- '» 1.,;;. rz, CWCB Member, passing 8,000 square miles,extends r._' `.: Gunnison River Basin from the continental divide to Grand 'oil: ' '.r.-- .-q, -i.e. Junction where it joins the Colorado Gunnison River(Photo courtesy of,'-iolle)/Noon) River. The major water development feature in the basin is the Aspinall Major Water rOWt f S Unit of the Colorado River Storage Organizations The basin is comprised of portions Project, consisting of Blue Mesa, of seven counties in the southwest- Crystal and Morrow Point Reservoirs. Water Conservation Distrit tg: em portion of the state. Between The three reservoirs store approxi- Colorado River • d=: : 1990 and 2000,the population in this 'nately 1.1 million acre-feet. Develop- region increased by 35 percent and .Went of the basin yield is limited by . Water Conservancy Districts Bostwick Park North Fork now accounts for 1.8 percent of the interstate compacts. Future develop- Crawford Tri-County state's total population. The graph ment will be limited by the Aspinall Fruitland Mesa Upper Gunnison River... below lists population for the Unit Section 7 Consultation. Grand Mesa of ..:.... . ,'..: the counties that are in portions other • this basin. Major tributaries to the Gunnison •Uncompahgre Valley Water Users River include the Uncompahgre, Association Taylor,Slate,East,North Fork,and Smith Fork Rivers;and Tomichi and Cochetopa Creeks. This basin con- Gunnison River Basin Population by County ----- ___ tains large amounts of U.S. Bureau of Total Basin Population Land Management and Forest Ser�tice 25- April 1990 98.700 °1 April 2000 79,300 lands. Agriculture is the dominant 20 Percent Growth. 35% wa r ur'�a t e. ce Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use e IF t'.15. Water Year 1998 1998(AF) 1996(AF) 10 Ell Irrigation 1,934,116 1,872,241 g ■Storage 1,098,029 678,300 a` [Municipal 14,357 16.918 5 13Industrial 1,060 973 ; ■Commercial 0 2,577 0 T elTransbasin 366,158 501 Water Year 1996 ■Stock 18,851 31,146 ,a'� a>e 0a oc ,o e "ce OFish 161,304 208,420 0 �� e ��` O coo= " ■Power 3,058,668 3,523,070 N" G° e c.) Source.Colorado Department of Local Affairs Total 6,852,543 6,334,146 Source. Division 4 and Division 7AnnualReportstotheState Additional Information about this river basins `\ Engineer available at http.//cwcb.state.co.us - . ..�. «..,..., Major Storage Projects Major Water Rights Calls Water rights administration on the Gunnison mainstem is in 2"."..\ Reservoir Normal Storage state of flux. Recovery flows for endangered fish and reserves. (acre-feet) ` rights for the Black Canyon National Park are expected to Blue Mesa Reservoir 940,800 change the status quo. Tributaries typically are controlled Morrow Point Reservoir 117,190 internally by senior agricultural water rights. Taylor Park Reservoir 106,200 Ridgway Reservoir 94,126 Historically,mainstem calls have been very infrequent. The Crystal Reservoir 26,000 Gunnison'.Runnel(1905 priority, 1,175 cfs)can control the Paonia Reservoir 20,950 Upper Gunnison but is nearly always satisfied by storage in Crawford Reservoir 14,395 Blue Mesa and Taylor Park Reservoirs. This operation is Silverjack Reservoir 13,520 expected to continue.The hydropower and storage rights of Onion Valley (a.k.a., Gould) Reservoir 9,000 the Aspinall Unit of the Colorado River Storage Project Overland Reservoir 5,828 (1957 priority)can call on the Upper Gunnison,but have not. Fruitgrowers Reservoir 4,540 A subordination agreement recognizing this practice has been finalized'which will allow 60,000 acre-feet of junior in-basin Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam depletions above the Aspinall Unit. Safety Database The now infrequent Redlands Water and Power call (750 cfs at Grand Junction)may occur often in the future. This water right has been satisfied historically by irrigation aDischarges return flows and reservoir releases from Bureau of Reclama- tion projects. Federal ESA Section 7 consultations may result Gunnison River near Grand Junction,Colorado in bypass flow requirementsbelow the Redlands diversion for 70O00 - recovery of the four endangered fish. These bypass require- •"--1. 18O00 - Average Annual Ilsehargs: 1,896,377 AF ©Avg.Yam, ments may result in a year-round Redlands call. Minimum Annual Discharge: 608,918 AF(19.14) 16.000 - Maximum Annual Discharge: ■Max.Year 3.766.620 AF(1964 14.000 - n Min.Year The Uncompahgre River is internally controlled by the 1 12.000 - irrigation water rights of the :.-.ne'.smpahv,re•Pzojcc:t which call I 1)000 every year.The number of users calling varies from year to f s.000 year. The North: Forks Smith of the Gunnison are also i t6.000 3 internally controlled. The Paonia f)itcb (1889 priority;9.05 cfs) 4,000 can dry the North Fork every year,however,irrigation return 2.000 flows usually satisfy users from Hotchkiss to Delta. On the Smith Foil:,water rights above Crawford generally dry the Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep stream each summer. Most water users rely on storage for irrigation water after mid-summer. Gunnison River near Gunnison,Colorado 20,000 _ .___�________�___.__._._._____.._._-__------_______.__._._._.________ Hydrological Variations Bl 18.000 - Avg.Year Average Annual Discharge: 543,209 AF Annual and seasonal variations are shown below for the .000 - .�Ma:.Year- �, 16 Minimum Annual Discharge: f98,607 AF(1977) � , Maximum Annual Discharge: 925,591 AF(1995) intim Ira: ' Gunnison River. g„ 14,000 - 12.000 - . . Gage Maximum Minimum , 10,000 - • Recorded Recorded 8,000 - Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) 2 € 6.000 Near Gunnison 11,400 (1918) 80 (1963) 4.000 - Near Grand Junction 35,200(1920) 106 (1934) 2.000 - , ;nit,. 4-. —M_,.,,.,_ .,fl- ITt1-,, -., Source:U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports !� Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Gunnison River Basin Facts Source:U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports m 2 Major Imports inn h o the Basin r,b. �`` No's Diversions • (acre-feet) .+, t' 1' Leon Lake Tunnel 1,405 2 Other 560 Total 1,965 ' '$ i Y"'xr ortfrom t � �., ` ar'n s. ,.. ' r ,i..•.,•1't .; Name Diversions z ' .. : (acre-feet) t �.:., 3 Redlands Canal 532,372 ;s Taylor Park Reservoir(Photo courtesy of Holley Noon) t 4 Divide Creek Highline Ditch 1,192 5 Tabor Ditch 791 6 Tarbell Ditch 310 Stream and Lake 7 Larkspur Ditch 122 I Total 534,787 t, Protection `Numbers in the above tables correspond to numbers that accompany arrows on the basin map(p. 5). There are 195 instream flow segments totalling approxi- Source:Water Division 4 1998 Annual Report. '0-year averages mater- 1,219 stream miles in this basin. There are also 83 lakes with decreed natural lake levels. These decreed s ,� . water rights are held by the CWCB to"protect the natural «'% „ < -"'--Pnvironment to a reasonable degree."The decreed flow or " '� * • ol - Ake level for each of these instream flow segments and natural lakes is based on the flow or lake level required to ,. `f> maintain the water-dependent natural environment. ° +�►► . =« Source:Colorado Water Conservation Board r I, , 4 _„ .. . ,„ • . ' . .s M t. , 4, i -,Wet and Dry Periods s, ¢> p 4 >'.j 6 Evert'year,Colorado experiences at least one 100-year flood x °+4,. V.,.; somewhere in the state. Colorado's total flood losses have ' ' been documented to be$4.9 billion to date. The basin's most - "` ' recent flood event was May 21-26, 1984. The estimated total Waterfall on Nellie Creek(Photo courtesy of Dae Lough} historic flood damages for this basin are$13.2 million to date. May through June 1993 Basin floods „r.: aec June ' E "' May through 1995 Dry Avg,x, Wet June 1957 Sept 1970 9 Basin floods Basin floods June 1984 Basin Basin floods floods I ) Source:Colorado Water Conservation Board and Division of Water Resources °'� Gunnison River Basin Facts - 3 Endangered pact F s s. :. Species Colorado River Compact of 1922 Under the Endangered Species Act, Allocates 7.5 million acre-feet (maf) of consumptive use annually to(1) the four Colorado River native fish Upper Colorado River Basin (those parts of Arizona,Colorado,New Mexico, species are listed as endangered: Utah,and Wyoming above Lee Ferry,Arizona) and(2) the Lower Colorado River Colorado pikeminnow (a.k.a. Colo- Basin (those parts of Arizona,California,Nevada,New Mexico and Utah below ratio squawfish),humpback chub, Lee Ferry,Arizona).This Compact requires the Upper Colorado River Basin to bouytail chub,and razorback sucker. deliver an average of 75 maf to the Lower Basin during any consecutive Causes for the decline of these 10-year period. The Lower Basin may increase its consumptive use by 1.0 maf in the future. species include alteration of stream flows by water projects,introduction oRio Grande,Colorado and Tijuana Treaty of 1944 between the United States of non-native species and efforts to remove the native fish from the and Mexico Guarantees delivery of 1.5 maf of Colorado River water per year to Mexico. system in the past. If there is not adequate surplus water to satisfy the obligation,the Upper and Lower In 1988,the States of Colorado,Utah Basins are to equally share the burden of reducing uses to make up any deficiencies. and Wyoming;water users;hydro- Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 power customers;envirorunental organizations;and federal agencies .kllocates the Upper Basin consumptive use of water as follows developed a program to recover these lrizona 50,01x1 act- /year' Colorado 51.75°o species while allowing water use and Utah 23°% development to continue. The ��t' Recovery Program for Endangered onunta • 14°o Fish of the Upper Colorado River New 14lexico 11?S°o —. _additionally,the Mate of Colorado may not deplete the flow in the Yampa River Basin is designed to achieve recovery by (1)improving flow conditions by below an aggregate of 5 maf over any l()-rear period. adding water to the river when needed by the fish, (2)improving and Depending upt n the interpretation of the Compacts,other laws,and the amount of devloping habitat, (3)reducing non- water in the river,Colorado right to the consumptive use to water under the native fish populations, and (4)devel compacts may range from 3.079 maf to 3.855 maf per year. Colorado currently oping native fish stocking programs. consumes an average of 2.3 maf per year with facilities in place using up to 2.6 maf. Colorado's apporticnnnent has not been divided among the various sub-basins within implementation of the Recovery Program should allow Colorado to the state. The Yampa and La Plata Ricer Basins have specific delivery obligations under the Compacts. The allcx:ation and administration of any surpluses and fully develop its entitlement to water shortages under the Compacts within Colorado remain open to discussion but under the compact. ultimately will be subject to determination and administration by the State Engineer. Source:Colorado Water Conservation Board : Humpback chub ` sc.:Q# ' ` �' Unique Characteristics A Presence of the Aspinall Unit of the Colorado River Storage Project. Uncertainty of river administration because of the endangered Blue Mesa Reservoir(Photo courtesy of Holley Noon) species and federal water rights claims. Gunnison River Basin Facts - 4 F ) ) ) Gunnison River Basin 4 10 0 10 20 Miles Grand Junction 1 k / I'll1� titewater ;I: stream Gag Gunnit ver near Gran Junctio d •f . so % 1 L! � 1 . : SSS nia .. a Orchard-9 .. 1 :4 .� ::... . otchlu . .L� Delta t . Oia ..:.:.:. ::: r 1 Gunnison \ Montro r O I ) Er. 1l � ' \ t I r."r Utu:ntsort .„, ..,,,,:-., „.:. I , .:.,,/ i ( ..] ''':''• '.1.' .:11.; :''... i v F. i y +w I S •1 • : 'S ! UA Rid. y y� — • J: ;;: • Municipality 1..:. 1 A CWCB Loan Construction Pr yj- ? rrt Water Export room Basin • �� r... Water Import into Basin . "E. .. ... •r'.✓:.:i: ,. Oura, ,.. r:,: __. .hay ;,.:.: :;'•Ilit— Major Stream or River \ -^ • ,::' ,,,.. .''S:':::.;';:r'i,'i •i,1,ire 11100 Instream Flow Reach °"` 1 i Designated Flood Plain I w;'%' ... s' ri'r. <2f; Major Lake or Reservoirt.,fivy.,..t{; A. BCounty CWCB Basin vww� . :a..�w,e.m�mv -mnnw.wc�a Gunnison RlverBasin-Facts ,(R ®NSlk Dolores & San Juan River Basin Facts ° ` _ ' 11,:7: Colorado Water Conse.rvatlon Board March 2002) l-1)\-....... /* / 4 493`74 Walden Greeley °Stan . Stetting Meeker ., as a sa �„ ti r` a ' � ,Glenwood 5D.nwr k s Bill Owens a Grand Springs Springs Bv5n91 q m F , ;rii ,::: Governor samgde Nmlaon sprin9a '' b b " '.,:i!"!,4..1:.'''.::::,' Greg Watcher +PwMo * DNR Executive Director *La Junta A`"1°n e Rod Kuharich . wr Q. CWCB Director Donald Schwindt CWCB Member, Overview , "� Dolores, San Juan, s The Dolores and San Juan River - .'; .r K*' „i„ ., Animas and San Miguel Basins are located in the southwest River Basins corner of the state. Major tributaries Animas River(Photo courtesy of James Page) to the San Juan include the Piedra, Los Pinos,Animas, Florida,La Plata C- ' l t h and Mancos Rivers and I\fcEltno Conservation and Creek. The San Miguel is the major Conservancy Districts These basins are comprised of tributary to the Dolores River portions of 10 counties in the south- ..---downstream of McPhee Reservoir. Water Conservation District western portion of the state. Between Southwestern 1990 and 2000, the population in this An average of 2.4 million acre-feet region increased by 38 percent and Water Conservancy Districts now accounts for 2.3 ercent of the leaves the state via these rivers each Animas-La Plata La Plata P year,which represents approximately San Juan Marcos state's total population.The graph 23 percent of the total water flow Dolores Paradox below lists populations for the Florida San Miguel r portions of the counties that are in out of the state. Development of basin yield is limited by interstate these basins. La Plata,Montezuma, Archuleta and San Miguel Counties compacts. Future development may be impacted by the San Juan River are facing serious growth problems. Basin Recovery Implementation Dolores and San Juan River Basin Population by County Program flow recommendations for 50 --- -------. the endangered fish. 45 Total Basin Pooutation April 1990 72,80001990 112000 40 Aprii 2000 100,500 Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use s 30 '"��"owm• S38% 1998(AF) 1995(M) t-25 ®Irrigation 938,788 975,491 0 20 444 --__ II Storage 193,010 353,567 O Municipal 18,208 14,242 n 15 0 D Industrial 452 4,931 ' 10 ■Commercial 3,023 30,329 4,800 2,639 5 ElTransbasin pp $ II Stock 41,907 43.375 0 i 1 „_ I 39,878 40,441 �'. e a $ OFish 305,015 334,341 Sage ,t oea� ? at day Q00 -Pa ��° 0I .e r t ae v T P�` ■Power ,N� ' ,of P' po 'y ,e° �,j �' Mks Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs �� Total 1,545,075 1,799.356 Source:Division 7 Annual Reports to the State Engineer and Additional information about this river basin is Water Districts 60.61 and 63 from Division 4 Annual Reports — available at http://cwcb.state.co.us tc Major r-.- s,Sa .,.Ige $-roief~'.`,` Major Water. Rich t- calls Some stream systems do not have water rights calls,while ':°' '46.p�.g� a. g' "°eaa`�m.n "nom �� o" in other stream systems senior irrigation water rights place Rtfelk Normal Storage calls every year Internally controlled streams include (acre-feet) Coal Creek La Plata River McPhee Reservoir 381,100 Elbert Creek Little Cascade Creek Vallecito Reservoir 129,700 3i- Ba Florida River Mancos River Lemon Reservoir 40,100 a Four Mile Creek Los Pinos River Cascade Reservoir 23,254p Groundhog Reservoir 21,000 Junction Creek Rito Blanco Narraguinnep Reservoir 18,960 it McElmo Creek Williams Creek Reservoir 10,084 Calls typically occur after spring runoff and extend Jackson Gulch Reservoir 9,980 through the end of the irrigation season. On the La Plata Summit Reservoir 5,954 River,calls generally occur earlier in the spring. Except for the La Plata,water is available in the stream system for Red Mesa Ward Reservoir 1,100 - appropriation near the state line and no call for water Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam priorities is necessary. Reservoir storage in many basins Safety Database serves to reduce the impact of calls.Water rights on the La Plata River are curtailed to meet La Plata River Compact delivery requirements to New Mexico,as well as intrastate administration. Annual Discharges Source: Division 7 Staff and Colorado Water Conservation Board Animas River at Durango,Colorado Stream and Lake Protection 7.00° _____.____.______ ___�____.____�_ i There are 113 instream flow segments totaling 867 stream Average Annual Discharge: 597,073 AF El Avg.Year b'°00 Minimum Annual Discharge: 218,321 AF(1977) miles in this basin. There are also 50 lakes with decreed Maximum Annual Discharge: 990,228 AF(1920) ■Mex.Year 5.00c natural lake levels. These decreed water rights are held by CI Min.Year S the CWCB to"protect the natural environment to a sr '°0C l reasonable degree." The decreed flow or lake level for I a 3.000 each of these instream flow segments and natural Likes is 1 2.0°0 based on the flow or lake level required to maintain the a water-dependent natural environment. 1.000 Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board I Oct Nov Dec Jan I et, Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Hydrological � ati ns Dolores River Near Bedrock,Colorado Examples of annual and seasonal flow variation are shown 3.500 .... .... .....--- —__._ cow. Average Annual Discharge: 288.032 AF O Avg.Year „,, 3.000 -Minimum Annual Discharge: 40,061 IT(1990) :::...:..:.. ... Maximum Annual Discharge: 514,869 AF(1993) •Max.Year ,' Maximum. Minimum Data Is for years 1985.1997 and reflects •• 2 0o Recorded Recorded r_, regulation by 381 000 AF McPhee Pesery ❑MM.Year 2 Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) N tow o Animas R. at Durango 10,700(1949) 94.00 (1913) T 1.500 - Dolores R. near Bedrock 8,300(1973) 0.12(1977) i e q 1.000 ' Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports :i rte. 500 i Source: U S Geological Survey Water Supply Reports a DOIOre5 & San Juan River $a51n pc1CL5 - 2 Unique Characteristics Major Imports into the Basin 4. A' The mainstems of the San Juan,Piedra and None e Animas Rivers are not overappropriated. 4 Streams are generally not overappropriated Major Exportsfrom t h e Basin within 10 miles of the state border except for the �� a� � �:�� reAF��wR La Plata. .. '. ... Diversions 4 The proposed_\nunas-La Plata Project is d . en- ..:, :..::..:...::.:: (acre-feet) dent on the San Juan Basin Recovery Implemen- tation Program for the endangered Colorado 1' San Juan - Chama Project 86,331 pikeminnow and razorback sucker. 2 Other 2,264 The second largest project allocation from Total 88.595 McPhee Reservoir is for the Dolores River fisher downstream of the reservoir. *Numbers in the above tables correspond to numbers that accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). -41I. The Southern Ute and Ute Mountain Tribes have Source:Division 7 1998 Annual Report, 10-year average reserved water rights claims which have been quantified by court decree. Settlement of these - .;, , ._ r ' ','„ 1°;' claims is not final and depends on Animas-La Plata construction. b _ a i. ' Wet and Dr Periods z' .�.. Z . Every year,Colorado experiences at least one i..•‘• ,; �•x ,` ,7 �, • „ 100-year flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's li `�� z4. x total flood losses have been documented to be « "' • ';' .." '.'.�,_• $4.9 billion to date. The basin's most recent major w s �1 •V flood event was May 2_1-26, 1984. The estimated `c x � , 4 total historic flood damages for this basin are �� $14.5 million to date. ' . k •' IIIIV, , -'::.'&1. to‘4 IF;Dry Avg Wet Las Animas River(Photo courtesy of James Pagel Oct 1972 Oct 1911 Lightner and Junction San Juan River floods Creeks flood near Pagosa s;S rin9 June 1927 Sept1970 Spring 1993 Animas River floods Animas River floods Animas River floods May 1984 Mancos River near I Durango near Durango above Durango Major flood floods near Mancos ;; • • ,,•,1 * '. E Source' Colorado Water Conservation Board and Division 7 Staff .,,-fMmYwaw'.a x Dolores & San ,Juan River Basin Facts 3. Endangered ComiDact Facts Species Colorado River Compact of 1922 Allocates 7.5 million acre-feet(maf) of consumptive use annually to (1) the Upper Under the Endangered Species Act, Colorado River Basin (those parts of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, four Colorado River native fish species and Wyoming above Lee Ferry,Arizona) and (2) the Lower Colorado River are listed as endangered: Colorado Basin (those parts of Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico and Utah below pikeminnow;humpback chub, bon}tail Lee Ferri;Arizona).This Compact requires the Upper Colorado River Basin to chub,and razorback sucker. Only the deliver an average of 75 maf to the Lower Basin during any consecutive pikeminnow and razorback sucker are 10-year period. present in the San Juan River. Causes for the decline of these species include Rio Grande,Colorado and Tijuana Treaty of 1944 between the United States alteration of stream flows by water and Mexico projects,introduction of non-native Guarantees delivery of 1.5 maf of Colorado River water per year to Mexico. species and past efforts to remove the If there is not adequate surplus water to satisfy the obligation,the Upper and Lower native fish from the system. Bad are to equally share the burden of reducing uses to make up any deficiencies. In 1990,the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 Service determined that depletions Allocates.the Upper Basin consumptive use of water as follows: from the proposed Animas-La Plata izcna 50,000 acre-feet/year Project could jeopardize the endan- Colorado 51.75% gered fish in the San Juan River. The Utah 23% States of Colorado and New Mexico, 1Tthounnif; 14% water users, hydropower customers, New Mexico 1125% and federal agencies developed additionally,the State of Colorado may not deplete the flow in the Yampa River program to recover these species while below an aggregate of 5 maf over any 10-year pr iod. allowing water use and development to continue. The San Juan River Basin La Plata River Compact of 1922 • Recovery Implementation Program Apportions the La Plata River between Colorado and New''Iexico. Each state has for endangered fish is designed to Unrestricted use between December 1 and February 15. Outside that period,each achieve recovery by improving flow :state can use the flow of the river at the state line if the flow in excess of 100 cfs. conditions by adding water to the river If the flow is less than 100 cfs, Colorado must ensure delivery of an amount of'flo w through re-regulation of the Navajo equal to one-half the flow of the river at Hesperus, Coloradoa Reservoir when needed by the fish, improving and developing habitat, Animas-La Plata Project Compact of 1968 reducing non-native fish populations, Assures New Mexico priority to the use of water delivered b;-the Animas-La Plata'`.::'::: and developing native fish stocking Project. The right to store and divert water for use in New Mexico under this programs. project shall be of equal priority to rights granted under Colorado Court Decree for uses in E;okirado from the project In 1996,the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service issued a revised Biological The Colorado Inct Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1988 • Opinion for the Animas-La Plata Settles the reserved water right claims of the Southern Ute and Ute Mountain Tribes Project that determined that a total of one all streams which crass the Reservations of the two tribes,with respect to quantity, 57,100 acre-feet could be depleted priority and administration. Claims on the Animas and La Plata Rivers are dependent from the San Juan Basin by the on eomstruction of the_ nitnas-La Plata Project. Colorado Court Decrees establish Animas-La Plata Project without the rights of the Tribes within the prioritv system The settlement established a jeopardizing the continued existence Tribal Development Lund, and Coloraalia's cost share cotiurfitmcmt to both the of the endangered fish. The Recovery Development Fund and the..Animas-1,a Plata Project has been paid or set aside- Implementation Program should allow as appropriate_ Colorado to fully develop its entitle- went to water under the compacts. Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board CDolores & San Juan River Basin Facts 4 Dolores and San Juan River Basin Since 1971,the CWCB has provided more than$3.9 million in loan financing for 11 water projects in this basin. Projects receiving over$500,000 are shown on the basin map as a red triangle I. MESA N .I - /- , W ' 1N E ill•ream Gage ; S • :..River droi Uravan '' `ROSESE Munidpality uCi x,� r. i CWCB Loin Construction Frojed Water Export from Basin Highway itaimr M:11 l .Instlreamor trFbw Reach earn or y �' Designated Flood Plain �� ' Major Lake or Reservoir 1 BCWCBBasin • SAN ' GU O.:�L , Li,/, a its de �4 Ipb. s, Ol0 0 •10 'JD Miles A DOLORES Y . ; JAN, ——,..,,./) ' 001IVI.\ /-1,,d, fi:i.T.;..tc•ibf. ‘ . a. Ott �, r •. fir / . 4. f , / '�' `4�r r a .T �rJrritt['r� ortez U,g....,1, ,,, '," VIP"- i n'31 )' v ey J:. tt • c v ,•,"' .L0 .., Du.ri ::...,.k 1 Pay•- . r • •Yfil 0 '1 EZUMA ..,, lursiditlij ,, ,.. i ti. ,. d •,.., . 1.iJt --‘101,-.1..0 'OM I - '''' '' ,,, E--7IFJ1-7, . (Dolores & San Juan River Basin Facts - 5) �,co.coNSk,�G South Platte/ Republican River Basin Facts ,a 7 ' 1 ,lolor�ado Water Conservation Board March 2002 o ' � '' • ' . ep'� 43„ it.' .. •k "�'IK sus _ Meekerlkli' � By7"_ ' CHp • c11 '� Grano Glenwood vM good � � � Bill Owens GnmdJunction Springs __' `AP:i "r .1'rye: Governor Ycdoraao Greg Watcher Springs Gunnison DNR Executive Director vPueblo ...}.: 'La Junta Rod Kuharich 'Durango qyw�. � CWCB Director m . Eric Wilkinson uve e `& i e � ``� ""~ .---:--,--.7t., „-.::.,.,,.. Carolyn McIntosh CWCB Members. The South Platte and Republican South Platte River Basin Rivers drain 20 percent of the state's `'n land area. Major tributaries to the 1 t ^h South Platte include Tarrvall,Plum, Cherry Creek Reservoir Bear, Cherry, Clear, Boulder,Big Dry, and St.Frain Creeks;and the Big Thompson and Cache La Poudre Water Conservancy Growth Rivers. The Republican River is a The basin is comprised of portions of Districts tributary to the Kansas River. 22 comities in the northeast comer of .•-, the state.Between 1990 and 2000 the Central Colorado ►griculture is the predominant water Lower South Platte population in this basin increased by use,with approximately 2.0 million 31 percent and now accounts for • Northern Colorado acre-feet per year used for Irrigation 68.9 percent of the state's total popula- of 1.1 million acres. additional $t.Vrain and Letthand'!':;:: .:'::'1: don. The graph below lists populations 880,000 acre-feet per year of ;:"Upper South Platte for the portions of the counties that are groundwater is applied for irrigation; in this basin. and 100,000 acre-feet per year of groundwater is used to meet munici- pal,domestic,livestock,industrial 600 M South Platte/Republican Racer Basin Population blr count'_ _ __, and commercial purposes. These Total Basin Population 01990 02000 values do not include water in the 500 Aor°2000 2,961,000 � April 2000 2,91,pp0 High Plains area from Ogallala n Percent Growth- 31% 400 Formation wells. o Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use 300 - O 1[198(AF) 1994(AF) =200- IS Irrigation 2,180,148 1,934,387 aee Year 1498 ■Storage 1,082,718 1.223,049 ,� 0Municipal 531,886 487,333 1 ��yg,. CI industrial 70,058 67,397 I 7f a • !Commercial 8,195 12,159 0 ---- O Domestic 12,286 10,850 cre d°°e� as ar.,fie son e`a e Fy o° e` k e` c e e 3c �r ■Stock 740 183 a< o r rA 4' -i° • , ar e, ' ' 0�0 �G �`T�Q a r` P Q o a G e, J�U\Q e`er c�o� Qa�a��a D Recreation 3,681 3,620 C, +.'§- s Pa 0 a o �a� �a Water ■Fish 6,674 7,656 Year 1494 [Augmentation 66,924 95,042 Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs illik.. }� [Recharge 104,656 68,997 ITotal 4,067,966 3.910,673 «. �Mn may.._ Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources, Division Annual Additional in o motion about this river basin is Reports and Division 7 Annual Reports { available at http://cwcb.state.co.uss: Major Storage Projects Major Water Rights Calls r1 Reservoir Normal The South Platte River is ov erappropriated. During most Storage days and most years, there is a call somewhere on the South Platte River. In the summer, the entire river is (acre-feet) generally controlled by direct flow calls that have priorities Horsetooth Reservoir 152,000 in the 1870s and 1880s. At times there may be as many as Carter Lake 112,200 six ditches taking the entire river flow at their headgates. Eleven Mile Canyon Reservoir 97,800 The major tributaries also have internal calls during the North Sterling 74,590 majority of the year which result in junior water rights Cheesman Reservoir 79,064 being curtailed from diverting water in those drainages. In Point of Rocks 74,590 the summer the calling ditches on the Cache la Poudre,Big Empire Reservoir 37,700 Thompson and Saint Frain Rivers and Boulder, Clear and Prewitt Reservoir 28,840 Bear Creeks have priorities that are generally in the 1860s Riverside Reservoir 65,000 and are senior to the call on the South Platte River. There- Spinney Mountain Reservoir 53,873 fore, the calls on the South Platte generally do not affect Standley Lake 43,344 the tributaries. Jackson Reservoir 35,629 Barr Lake 32,100 Aurora Reservoir 32,400 Gross Reservoir 41,811 'Stream Lite rot c j Julesburg Reservoir 31,800 Chatfield Reservoir 26,600 There are 212 instream flow segments totaling approxi- Milton Reservoir 29,732 mately 1,339 stream miles in this basin. There are also Antero Reservoir 25,618 35 lakes with decreed natural lake levels. These decreed Marston Reservoir 19,795 water rights are held by the CWCB to "protect the natural -. Button Rock Reservoir 16,080 environment to a reasonable degree." The decreed flow or Horse Creek Reservoir 18,747 lake level for each of these instream flow segments and Cherry Creek Reservoir 13,226 natural lakes is based on the flow or lake level required to Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of maintain the water-dependent natural environment. Dam Safety Database Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board Ann Discharges Hydroioaica1 Variations South Platte River at Julesburg Annual and seasonal variations are shown below for the 600 -- - --. South Platte River at Denver and )ulesburg. ai Avenge Annual Discharge: 393,509 AF ®Avg Year - MM.700MM.Annual Discharge: 55,392 AF(1956) ■Max Year 0 Max.Annual Discharge: 2,099$3a AF(1983) qa 600 ❑Min Year � Maximum S Minimum a 500 Recorded Recorded s 400 Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) _>300 At Denver 40,300 (1965) 8.8 (1951) s zao At Julesburg 37,600 (1965) 0.0 (1902) s e 100 a , s g s ® re Source: U.& Geological Survey Water Data Reports o s Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports South Platte River Basin Facts - 2) i . ,. , •, . Major Imports into the Basin Name Recipient Stream Diversions (acre-feet) " 1*Adams Tunnel Big Thompson R. 231,060 �,�` r �� a � _ - 2 Moffat Tunnel South Platte R. 52,912 3 Roberts Tunnel South Platte R. 68,767 t 4 Grand River Ditch Cache La Poudre R. 20,256 r 5 Laramie-Poudre Cache La Poudre R. 16,104 Canal y.- " � F 6 Aurora Homestake South Platte R. 16,544 E r �, '�;?� 7 Michigan Ditch Cache La Poudre R. 4,410 �4 T ;' �� t. i ` �. �`� j 8 Berthoud Pass Ditch Clear Creek 1,090 I. .A .. n...''y C . „..a, , � � �, 9 Wilson Supply Ditch Cache La Poudre R. 1,673 A. i� a:,,,..,-,.::::-.!-:.'-'0': ., ' "'� :�''x i x., ,�: F.,:,�' a w. .M €e .y $. ? ' lwd£,ams , n None om . �, ' "Numbers in the above table correspond to numbers that _ :. « ,i accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). e e_ . • -A'" " 'Continental Hoosier Tunnel exports from the Colorado +rk Basin to the Arkansas Basin through a portion of the South J '�'' Platte Basin. Jefferson Lake (Photo courtesy of Theresa Stone) Source: Division 1 1998 Annual Report, 10-year averages W �;. Unique Characteristics Wei and Dry Perloos Average imports into the South Platte Basin exceed Every year,Colorado experiences at least one 10(1-near flood those in all other basins. somewhere in the state. Colorado's total flood losses have Ni Reliance on Denver Basin non-tributary groundwater, been documented to be$4.9 billion to date. The South Platte which has a limited life, for municipal and Basin's most recent major flood event was July 28-29, 1997. industrial needs. The estimated total historic flood damages for this basin are 4 Presence of threatened and endangered species $3.4 billion to date. significantly affects water resources management and development. . :=;. July-Aug 1976 D Avg Wet Big Thompson and rY 9 June&Sept 1933 Cache la Poudre flood July 1997 Castlewood Dam June 1965 Fort Collins, fails Basin floods Sterling flood Upper Basin N; '''' 'ilil!q!'4il .!JIL •'''‘°"° ^'' °"' :7::', ite, -Igig Lower Basin t ; tli �; g a a .r sA '.,�ititi 5�� tY.Y. ' o § is I A g A § A l if! § § § I Sept 2-4, 1938 May 5-6, 1973 July 12, 1996 Bear and Clear Basin floods Buffalo Creek Creeks flood floods July 15, 1982 ,r-� Dam Failure, Roaring&Fall Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board Rivers flood South Platte River Basin Facts - 3 EndangeredCompact Facts Species South Platte River Compact of 1923 In the Platte River Basin n Central Establishes Colorado's and Nebraska's rights to use water in Lodgepole Creek and the South Platte River. Nebraska has the right to fully use water in Lodgepole Nebraska, the whooping crane, piping Creek before Lodgepole enters Colorado. Colorado has the right to fully use plover,interior least tern,and pallid water in the South Platte River between October 15 and April 1. Between April 1 sturgeon are listed as threatened or endangered under the federal Endan- and October 15,if the mean daily flow of the South Platte River at Julesburg gered Species Act. The U.S. Fish and drops below 120 cfs and water is needed for beneficial use in Nebraska,water Wildlife Service has concluded that the rights in Colorado between the western boundary of Washington County and the habitat for these species has been state line (the"Lower Section") with priority dates junior to June 14, 1897 are curtailed. In addition to prior perfected rights in Colorado in use at the time of reduced by water diversions and land the Compact in the Lower Section, Colorado reserves the right to develop use changes. The CWCB has worked 35,000 acre-feet of storage in the Lower Section. as a member of a three-state partner- ship to (1) improve habitat for these species so water use and future Republican River Compact of 1942 development do not jeopardize these Establishes the rights of Colorado,Nebraska and Kansas to water in the Republi- can River Basin and makes specific allocations of the right to make beneficial species, (2) help water users to comply consumptive use of water from identified streams.with federal laws, and (3) prevent new species from being listed. environmental water account in water supply means for further enhanc- An Action Plan is being developed to Nebraska's Lake McConaughy, and ing flow conditions by an additional provide an average of 130,000 to (3) developing a groundwater 60,000 to 80,000 acre-feet per year 150,000 acre-feet per year for restor- recharge and river re-regulation project from water conservation or new water ing habitat along the Platte in Central near Tamarack State Wildlife Area in supply sources within the three states. Nebraska. This water will be pro- Colorado. These actions are expected An Environmental Impact Statement is vided in part by (1) restoring the to provide an additional approximately being prepared that analyzes these storage capacity of Pathfinder Reser- 70,000 acre-feet per year of water for actions. Following completion of the voir in Wyoming, (2) establishing an the threatened and endangered species EIS, the federal government and states in Central Nebraska. The plan will may agree to participate in a 15-year uroundwater identify other water conservation or implementation program. r g Alluvial Aquifer Along Denver Basin Designated Groundwater Basins the South Platte and Bedrock Aquifers Including the High Plains Aquifer its Tributaries Aquifer Width: 1 to 10 miles Consist of Dawson, Denver, Arapahoe, and Designated groundwater basins Characteristics Thickness: <5 to 200 feet Laramie-Fox Hills sedimentary rocks include Lost Creek, Kiowa Bijou, Northern High Plains and Upper Crow Creek. 1 Primary Uses Agriculture, municipal and domestic Municipal,industrial and domestic Agricultural and domestic Yield Wells can yield up to 2,000-3,000 gpm Water contained in these aquifers within Water in transient storage in the where the sands and gravels the five-county area in and adjacent to alluvial aquifers varies from are thick and contain only a small Denver Metropolitan area is approximately 150,000 acre-feet (Upper Crow percentage of fine materials. 467 million acre-feet, of which 150 million Creek)to 2.4 million acre-feet Approximately 8 million acre-feet of acre-feet is recoverable. 1998 level of use (Kiowa Bijou). water is contained in the South Platte for the Denver Basin is estimated at alluvium. 57,000 acre-feet/year, or 4% of the g maximum recoverable annual appropriation. Recharge Precipitation, irrigation return flows, Recharge minimal,with the majority coming Precipitation, imported water, and Source canal seepage, and seasonally from outcrop areas seasonally from streams from the South Platte River and 1 its tributaries Water Rights Prior appropriation system with Senate Bill 5,administered under a Colorado Ground Water Commission I,,,,4 Administration well pumping covered by plans 100-year aquifer life and local management districts for augmentation or temporary supply plans Source: Colorado Department of Natural Resources south Platte River Basin Facts - 4', South Platte and Republican River Basin ,. F lesburg A f w e 7:1:, RIA4 "'"'S \'. `11 . :,,,,,L;;;:.....,....., . i"g� PHIL .. • Municipality .. \ r A CWCB Loan . ; ` 1 _ A 1 ,' Construction Project 1. t ._� �, ',4 Water Import f r t Mo _ into Basin 1 %'r MORCAN Major Stream or River Y-.� reu n `4" knstream Flow Reach • - f M Designated Flood Plain n rS. A / j Major Lake or Reservoir Z ti^.�f r r A { 4 Denver Basin Aquifer , } R 4 �r _A g7 ar§htcr4 r I YI.JMA ` Designated Ground �. + r' ) ,r1) WASHINGTON Ej#'JC7'l`ON 1 ,/ Water Basin I '' i /Okiin CWCB Basin ,e t i RT .: i. iitr//jj(6��p '/�(I/y I '/} 'AR O' t �` �', ',.. ;:to;J�; '•" } 1• I { ® „l / i-: .--, ..--'—`'--,—..'s.1,1 .,-N4'''' ) - `l/... : _ .,;::, Barley` 7'`'f'< t LINCOLN KI i ..ARSON r i • tf?fla `i"( 1tfR _i 'f ' I ! \ r ) ,rr`..,,,. osnvert3akr �� .. ,r•'7:•Et: t; reirplay / - p , /..J I.� _ _ '• - t J // 1 �„ 10 0 10 20 Mies .r • • �;:; . TELLEfl j"'�. CHE F::Pay-_ --- ro k yenne -t. Is Since 1971, the CWCB has provided more than $53.9 million in loan financing for 80 water projects in this basin. r fO - �M�y • Projects receiving over$500,000 are shown on the basin map as a red triangle A. 4 South Platte River Basin Facts - D ^„,, CO_L Sfk1 North Platte River Basin Facts = , , 22Da)rado Water Conserxration Bcrarci kriarch 2002 5.:: ,,,1Z,) !..z.- g •Sterling breaks •Greeley 4 7 9 ? 7 e •Gl.nwood *Denver Grant! Springs Burlington ,,y: Bill Owens Archon -.p Governor .celondo Spinga Gunni$on Av *- •Puebla Greg Watcher * aJUMa . n' .- — DNR Executive Director Abmbsa *Durango n a . uhanch Rod Director CWCB Overj " a,,a .,`" Robert O. Burr The North Platte River Basin drains the f t`° , .,. . ' CWCB Member, '. North Platte River Basin north central portion of the state and consists of the North Platte River and _ two tributaries, the Laramie River and Lost Lake (Photo courtesy of Bill Green) Sand Creek, which originate in Colorado and join the North Platte River in\Vvo- g,,, mmg. The M -^Michigan, Illinois and Canadian rowt h Ricers and <rniah Creel are ribut�rics to Water Conservancy The North I'latte River Basin is the North Platte River in Colorado. Districts cotnprised of portions of Larnner and Jackson counties. Between 1991) and The major water use in the basin is the Jackson County 200(1, the population in this region irrigation of approximately 130,900 acres Michigan River increased b1 4 percent and now (in 1998). Most irrigated land is in the accounts for about 0.104 percent of the North Platte River drainage (115,500 acres) state's total population. The graph with smaller acreage on the Laramie River below lists populations for the (5,000 acres) and Sand Creek (350 acres). portions of the counties that are in this basin. Administration of the North Platte River Basin is divided between Divisions 1 North Platte River Basin Population by County (South Platte River) and 6 (Yampa and 2 \\lite Rivers). The Laramie River and Total08OatPtIawamn ' Apra 1900 1,909 01999 112°°°. Sand Creek are administered as part of Apra 2GDP r,900 d Division 1, and the North Platte River is g servynnarawels 4% administered as part of Division 6. I'> x j. Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use 1 &q�vN.„ _ a 1998(AF) 1994(AF) ° 1. ®Irrigation 404,195 376,308 u '-,r•. ,337 4 • ',.''.4440O.,4z512.,"' '.b 0 Municipal 6233,433 5259 i e � %1 ,g a r s 0industrial 44 61 ■Commercial 0 0 0 � o Domestic 0 0 ■Stock 2745 4664 / oc O Recreation 0 0 �a )ac sp87 ' #A ■Fish 65 565 °�4�'®�`�` °��^`'� �= t�gip: ®Augmentation 0 0 Source Colorado Department of Local Affairs fir.: .. ltigfrte. ❑Recharge 0 0 Total 413,715 387,194 i-- Source: Division 6, Water District 47 and Division 1, Water District 48 _ Additional information about this river basin is and 76 Annual Reports available at http://cwcb.state.co.us Major S : ra r e Water Rights Calls Most water rights calls occur on the tributaries to the North Reservoir Normal Storage Platte River and not on the mainstem. The major tributaries (acre-feet) generally are under administration in dry years and may be Lake John 7,092 under administration in average Years. The priorirY call varies MacFarlane Reservoir 6,951 throughout the year and from ditch to ditch when the system Walden Reservoir 4,506 is on call. The Wolfer Creek Ditch on the Roaring Fork; Meadow Creek Reservoir 4,400 Midland Ditch on the Illinois River;Mutual Ditch on Grizzly Laune Reservoir 3,722 l, Creek; and the Cumberland,Lost Treasure and Kiowa Pole Mountain Reservoir 1,905 Ditches on the Michigan River represent some of the North Michigan Creek Reservoir 1,730 frequently calling rights on the tributaries. Lower Big Creek Reservoir 1,434 Agua Fria Reservoir 550 Reservoir storage is administered in order to comply with Seymour Reservoir 525 North Platte Decree requirements for storage in Colorado West Arapahoe Reservoir 497 reservoirs in the basin;these storage limitations have never Buffalo Reservoir 350 been exceeded. Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam Safety Database Hydrological atnaL§§-- non` Examples of annual/seasonal variations for the North Platte AnnuI.a Di `-n r s are presented below and in the annual discharge graphs. Laramie River near Glendevey Gage Maximum Minimum 60 .. ....-__ . ..__., _ $ ®AYg.Year Recorded Recorded --, b so Average Annual Discharge: 52,264 AF Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) 6 Minimum Annual Discharge: 19,912 AF(1977) ■Max.Year Maximum Annual Discharge: 102,513 AF(1917) Near Northgate 6,450 (1923) 19 (1934) 5 40 ❑Min.Year Near Glendevey 1,140 (1923) 6.0 (1920) > Y30 Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports 20 i t10 6 0 Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep ` m^xp . =sue, :°d� North Platte River near Northgate,Colorado 250 I Average Annual Discharge: 314,183 AF D Avg.Year t200 Mininimum Annual Discharge: 84,985 AF(1977) Maximum Annual Discharge: 835,938 AF(1917) a Max.Year $ ❑Min.Year ^"₹may .(31x_•. ,. .. m 150- .8 T.,10O 4 50 J € a 16s F� r� m♦0 Fes--. II xmi ° Photo courtesy of Colorado State Parks Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep ."'..„ Source: Colorado Department of Natural Resources and U.S. Geological - - Survey Water Data Reports C North Platte River Basin Facts - 2 Name Diversions (acre-feet) 1* Laramie-Poudre Tunnel 16,104 tie l a ' _ 2 Michigan Ditch 4,410 3 Wilson Supply Ditch 1,673 _ 4 Other 461 $"° Total 22,648 Major Imports into the Basin None .aa...a".L. ..'"....e d°..... d4P eH a eu. Photo courtesy of Colorado State Parks " Numbers in the above table correspond to numbers that accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). stream rd LakeProtection Source: Division 1 and Division 6 Engineer's 1998 Annual Report 10-year average. There are 40 instream flow segments totaling approxi- mately 227 stream miles in this basin. There are also 29 lakes with decreed natural lake levels. These decreed water rights are held by the CWCB to "protect the natural '^-nvironment to a reasonable degree." The decreed flow or _ - ake level for each of these instream flow segments and natural lakes is based on the flow or lake level required to " - 5 xg- maintain water-dependent natural habitat Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board .m-..«,....... ........ .,. .. ... et-.z m.. _ i '-1 Every year, Colorado experiences at least one 100-year flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's flood losses have been • documented to be$4.9 billion. The basin's most recent major flood event was May-)une 1957. The estimated total historic damages for this basin are$110,000 to date. Three Island Lake (Photo courtesy of Bill Green) sa�et Dry Avg Wet 1923 1957 1980 1984 Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods"LIE_m..�a...Ww....�,�.... yyp¢ Ww 5wq 'u`smv ��pp �Wp�«�. ....a 5Q �+ @ �q ywp qp 5up� 5p �p n 6 6 C a S fir a a t5 Y6 0 D O dq b to 6. Source: Division 6 Engineer's Office North Platte River Basin Facts - 3 Endangered Compact Facts Species What it is: Nebraska v. Wyoming 325 U.S. 665 (1945) In 1994, the Secretary of the Interior and 345 U.S. 981 (1953) and the Governors of Colorado, What it does: Equitably apportions water in the North Platte River between Nebraska and Wyoming entered into the Colorado, Nebraska and Wyoming "Platte River Memorandum of Agree- How: Limits total irrigation in Jackson County to 145,000 acres and ment" (MOA), in which they agreed to 17,000 acre-feet of storage for irrigation during any one irrigation season. Limits total water exports from the North negotiate a program to conserve and Platte River in Colorado to no more than 60,000 acre-feet protect the habitat of four species listed as endangered under the Endangered during any 10-year period. Species Act. Three bird species, the interior least tern,whooping crane, and What it is: Wyoming v. Colorado, 260 U.S. 1 (1922) piping plover, occupy the Central Platte and 309 U.S. 572 (1940) River Valley between Lexington and What it does: Establishes the rights of Colorado and Wyoming to water in the Chapman, Nebraska. A fourth species, Laramie River Basin. he pallid sturgeon,is a fish that lives in How: Limits total diversions from the Laramie River in Colorado to a tthe lower Platte River below its total of 39,750 acre-feet,divided among specific water facilities, confluence with the Elkhorn River in including 15,500 acre-feet through the Laramie-Poudre Tunnel; Nebraska. The land and water habitat 18,000 acre-feet through the Skyline Ditch;and 4,250 acre-feet in these areas has been modified by a through various "meadow land appropriations." combination of events, including flow alteration as a result of upstream water development and land uses in The purpose of the Program is to the proposed Program and a range of Nebraska. enable existing and new water uses in alternatives,as required under the the Platte River Basin to proceed National Environmental Policy Act. At Pursuant to the MG.A, the states and the without additional actions required that point,the parties intend that a long- Department of the Interior signed a (beyond the Program) under the term program will be developed and Cooperative Agreement which outlines Endangered Species Act. A Gover- they will enter into an agreement for its a "Recovery Implementation Program" nance Committee with members from implementation. The State of Colo- to improve and conserve habitat for the three states,water users,environ- rado will need to determine how it will these species. The Program specifies mental groups, and two federal agen- participate in the program with respect both flow measures in Colorado, cies has been established to implement to this basin. Wyoming and Nebraska, and habitat the Cooperative Agreement. Over the measures in Nebraska that will be next three years,an evaluation will be implemented to improve habitat. conducted to measure the impacts of Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board g41x"B t,a "z.,{�, Characteristics ��,1.&iaEslato cSe sa' Administration of the North Platte River Basin is divided between Divisions 1 and 6. Present use and future development of water resources in the North Platte River Basin are controlled by the Supreme Court Decree for the North Platte River. Present litigation, primarily between the States of Nebraska - and Wyoming,has created some uncertainty-concerning present and future management and development of the North Platte River which will not be resolved until conclusion of this litigation. The Recovery Implementation Program for the Central Platte River in Photo courtesy of Colorado State Parks Nebraska has potential for creating uncertainty concerning present manage- ment and future water resources development potential for the North Platte River Basin in Colorado. - - North Platte River Basin Facts - 4 ) North Platte River Basin :7`�'� earl C r ; , Nor Or €�jaiTA.$iverr .- ::\ ' ":...: :.,.:' ' ' 'I:. ' \ ... ... \\:1 ~7:,:. react►near t4orttu ,.�.._ •� '' _._" _.,._ /��./� ra e Rivere COW-Orf , 1 t~i�nds Glendeve • -1.t..,4K( j_cr/- r .E:.., '` r� 1 i EFL.. �... Walden 4 _ ,ry Nrant ' ( ''.72.:) •- •ici:.,.......\,,-v-. :: :• ,:!,,„ - V ~X • ~ ✓ y tMunicipality ee oa L Construction Project \. Water Export from Basin Since 1971, the CWCB has ( — Highway .:.:: , Major Stream or Reach provided over$1.5 million in '�'' �L. Ins a loan financing for two water �` �`� Designated Flood Plain projects in this basin. Each 4o Major Lake or Reservoir f I�County project received over$500,004 `. ;"'::.:,<: h Basin and is shown on the basin map as a red triangle A. North Platte River Basin Facts 5 Rio Grande Basin Facts ,q,......„,,,,,,..c...„,...„ g@.^�,y Water ,+'^� p^,t+�-' 1'4041'_ _„„ A ,j x -,,o@oA a' o Conservation Bo£ c i ,:.,...--z-,...-;;„ } "I` 'rw 131 March � � a r� ��` a oar � YYa kMn `5sen.y - - _ s-1 a �: • f`87—€, • • meek!, `Greeley • 19 3 1 • Gbnwood "Denver,. Gard sc t,s a.1^9I e . "bj '+,{,. Bll Owens J tion .caorado ':'.- � ., . .. ..-....4- lGovernor i,, t3 Sponge e•• Gumison ' '•' r Pueblo Nest\ •u Junta .. • Greg Watcher 1x4 a a..4as DNR Executive Director an ow i oxx Rod Kuharich �*� CWCB Director Overview .. ,. c : .. tiff„: -. Raymond Wright The Rio Grande system drains approxi- • � mately 8,000 square miles in south central _ ; ' .. • . ..: Rio Grande CWCBeBasin Colorado. The Rio Grande and the Conejos River rise in the eastern San Juan Mountains and flow through the San Luis Medano Creek Valley. In the northern portion of the basin,streams flow into the "Closed Growth Basin,"an internal drainage encompassing Conservation d n d The basin is comprised of all or approximately two-thirds of the San Conservancy Districts portions of seven counties. Between Luis Wallet. 1990 and 2000,the population in- Water Conservation District Rio Grande creased by 15' percent, and now ac- (he Rio Grande's largest tributary is the `.. . counts for approximately 1.1 percent Conejos River,whose major tributaries, Water Conservancy Districts of the state's total population.The in turn,are the San Antonio and the Los San Luis Valley Alamosa-La Jara graph below lists population for the Pinos Rivers. Other tributaries to the Rio Conejos Costilia County portions of the counties that are in Grande include the Alamosa River and Trinchera this basin. La Jara and Trinchera Creeks. La Garita, Carnero,Saguache,San Luis and many other streams flow into the Closed Basin and do not have a natural surface outlet to the Rio Grande. Rio Grande Basin Population by County Irrigated agriculture is the largest water use in the basin, Total Basin Population I consuming more than 85 percent of all water used. An 14 nPPnl Zoo 39,6000 A 15199•■Zoeo l estimated 600,000 acres are under irrigation which are a 12 Percent Growth= 15% I supplied by conjunctive use of surface and groundwater. $to a i Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use 5 8 '1 2: 9. a 6 3' A I R a' 1 1998(AF) 1994(AF) g 4 l wow Year 499E D Irrigation 1,144,192 1.191.835 ' a t ■Storage 58,052 77,667 2 A� CI Municipal 10,692 8,770 r. i O Industrial 155 202 0 t ■Commercial 321 2,139 a�� c'L 1' o5 4% ae r© D Domestic 5,958 7,977 ,/ ice ce c,oc°, ./' �f .tea° ■Stock 0 849 ' oo water year ism i7 Recreation 284 954 ■Fish 494 2,883 Source: Colorado Department of Local Affairs O Augmentation 3,803 4,671 t]Recharge 6,660 11,702 _ _ ^^^^ Total 1,230,611 1,309,649 AClditiotlal in a i ut this river basin is °' Source: Division 3 Annual Reports available at http://cwcb.state.co.us Maior Storage Projects Major Water Rights Calls Usually by mid-July native [lows in all of the basin streams ''^ Reservoir Normal Storage have receded to the point that only the most senior water (acre-feet) rights have water available to them and reservoir releases Sanchez Reservoir 103,114 provide supplemental water. All streams in the Rio Grande Platoro Reservoir 59,571 Basin are on call throughout an normal irrigation season. Rio Grande Reservoir 52,192 The Rio Grande and the Conejos River system are on call Santa Maria Reservoir 43,826 year-round from water right calls and/or the Rio Grande Continental Reservoir 22,679 Compact Much of the Rio Grande mainstem surface Mountain Home Reservoir 17,374 water is used conjunctively with the groundwater system in Terrace Reservoir 15,182 order to provide a reliable irrigation season supply. La Jara Reservoir 14,052 Smith Reservoir 5,808 The State Engineer has had a moratorium on new appro- Beaver Park Reservoir 4,758 priations from non-exempt confined aquifer wells since Eastdale Reservoir No. 1 3,468 1972 and on non-exempt unconfined aquifer wells since Eastdale Reservoir No. 2 3,041 1982. Agreements have been reached with all major water Big Meadows Reservoir 2,436 user groups, including both surface and groundwater Head Lake 1,500 interests, that have precluded the need for groundwater administration rules at the present time. The C\MCB and the State Engineer's Office (SEO) are currently working on E G 'j 0 OCIFuct: Iv i( I ci t j O. 1 S the Rio Grande Decision Support System (RGDSS) that Gage extremes for the Rio Grande near Del Norte, as will answer many outstanding basin concerns. Under the the river enters the San Luis Valley, and at Lobatos, legislation that enabled the RGDSS, the SEO will promul- downstream of the last diversion in Colorado before the gate rules that address the potential for new appropriations river enters New Mexico, are shown in the following in the confined aquifer. table. Seasonal variations are shown below in the annual Stream and Lake discharge graph. d Protection There are 133 instream flow segments totaling approximately Gage Maximum Minimum 971 stream miles in the basin. There are also 48 lakes with Recorded Recorded decreed natural lake levels. These water rights are held by Flow(cis) flow(cfs) the CWCB to"protect the natural environment to a reason- Near Del Norte 14,000 (1911) 69 (1902) able degree." The decreed flow or lake level for each of Near Lobatos 13,100 (1905) 0 (1950) these instream flow segments and natural lakes is based on Source: Colorado Department of Natural Resources the amount required to maintain the water-dependent natural environment. Annual Discharges Rio Grande Near Del Norte WY1912-1998 - s000 ax.r a..a 657Amif +9e Discharge: 4500 s Minimum Annual Discharge 724,760 AF(1977) 0 Avg Year Maximum Mnuel Discharge: 1,071,041 AF(1967). .a 4000- ■Max Veer n e u sap- ❑Min Year K ice. d 8 sE 2500- e R � : t' ' .. Y 2000 £ £ h S ia r— u 1500. i a s „ OF 4 , 1000— 5 �(` r t "` e ^s4 § FIJI 3 MD I. + D Alg,#1,rU-1,(fl-i It s ,1 .1 a Ephemeral stream in the Great Sand Dunes National Park OA Nay Dec Sao Feb Mar in a J (Photo courtesy of Adam Bingham) Source: US Geological Survey Water Data Reports Rio Grande Basin Facts - 2 Unique Characteristics Major Imports into the Basin Approximately 2,700 square miles in the San Luis Name Recipient [)hrersis Valley form an internal drainage called the Closed St1'eattl (acre eeQ Basin, for which there is no surface outlet to the 1• Tarbell Saguache 310 Rio Grande. 2 Weminuche Pass Ditch Weminuche 652 4 The Closed Basin Project is a system of 170 salvage 3 Pine River-Weminuche Weminuche 433 wells which draw from the shallow, unconfined Pass Ditch aquifer and salvage water that otherwise would be lost 4 Wms Cr.-Squaw Pass D. Squaw 308 to evapotranspiration. 5 Don La Font D. 1 &2 Red Mountain 198 6 Treasure Pass Ditch Pass 98 San Luis Valley irrigation relies heavily upon conjunc- 7 Tabor Pass Ditch Spring 846 tive use of groundwater and surface water. An estimated 85 to 90 percent of irrigation water in the central part of the valley is from managed recharge 4 and pumping of unconfined-aquifer wells. Development of new supplies may be affected by Name Diversions the Rio Grande Compact, endangered species, (acre-feet) interstate litigation, and overappropriated surface and 8 Hudson Branch Ditch 117 groundwater sources. 9 Medano Ditch 1,047 Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board *Numbers in the above tables correspond to numbers that accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). Source: Division 3 1998 Annual Report, 10-year Averages gym. e and D ro Pe nods Even-year, Colorado experiences at least one 100-year flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's total flood losses to date •> �"° � have been documented to be$4.9 billion. The basin's most : recent flood event was June 9, 1985. The estimated total historic food damages for this basin are$12.1 million to date. ._ s Dry Avg Wet Great Sand Dunes National Park(Photo courtesy of Adam Bingham) Oct 1911 June 1927 June 1941 Sept 1970 June 1985 Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods Basin floods I I Iy I 6, 16 66. 66666616' 666' 6 666-66 _...rSource: Colorado Water Conservation Board; and McKee, Doesken, and Kleist, Historical Dry and Wet Periods in Colorado, Figures, Colorado 'limate Center, Colorado State University, 1999. Rio Grande Basin Facts - 3 Endangered Compact Facts f' c S United States - Mexican Water Treaty of 1906 ^ Guarantees the delivery of 60,000 acre-feet of water annually at the International The Colorado Wildlife Commission has listed the Rio Grande sucker as Dam at Ciudad Juarez, except during periods of extreme drought. Elephant Butte endangered. The Division of Wildlife Reservoir in New Mexico was constructed partly to ensure the nation's ability to meet this obligation. The Rio Grande Compact provides that the allocations of is coordinating a recovery plan for his species. water to the states shall not be increased or diminished by reason of changes in the delivery or loss of water to Mexico. The silvery minnow is federally listed as endangered. Historically, this Rio Grande Compact of 1938 species occurred throughout he Rio Establishes Colorado's obligation to ensure deliveries of water at the New Mexico Grande Basin in New Mexico and state line and New Mexico's obligation to assure deliveries of water at the Elephant Butte Reservoir,with some allowance for credit and debit accounts. The obligations Texas. It now occurs only in the Rio are calculated based on a schedule of deliveries. The Compact establishes the Rio Grande downstream of Cochiti Dam to Grande Compact Commission to administer the terms of the Compact. The the headwaters of Elephant Butte Commission consists of one representative from each state and a non-voting Reservoir in New Mexico, about five federal representative. Several tributaries to the Rio Grande are not subject to the Rio percent of its historic range. The primary limitation to recovery is a lack Grande Compact adm nistraton. of perennial river flows in the middle Rio Grande,diversion structures and Amended Costilla Creek Compact of 1963 water quality. Establishes uses,allocations and administration of the waters of Costilla Creek in Colorado and New Mexico. The Compact makes apportionments and allocations C r().i ;n cl,,,vate r among specific facilities. It is administered by the Costilla Creek Compact Commis- sion,which is composed of the water officials from Colorado and New Mexico. The use of groundwater in the San Luis r Valley dates from the late 1800s,when small-production wells were drilled into become the predominant method of acre-feet annually,of which an estimated the upper few hundred feet of the irrigation water management, particu- 800,000 acre-feet is from groundwater confined aquifer. Since the 19'70s larly north of the Rio Grande. sources. Approximately 3,500 of the conjunctive use by controlled recharge 6,500 wells in the basin with greater than of surface water through ditch diver- Irrigated agriculture is by far the 50 gpm capacity are in use. sions and well pumping from the dominant water use in the basin,using Source: Colorado Department of Natural shallow("unconfined") aquifer has an estimated average of 2 million Resources and RGDSS I Groundwater Source Unconfined Aquifer Confined Aquifer m San Luis Valley ₹Aquifer 40 to 100 feet thick 500 to <4,000 feet thick and estimated to average Characteristics Unconsolidated alluvial sand and gravel. 2,000 feet thick across most of the San Luis Valley. I i. Clay layers separate the aquifers. Upper portions same as unconfined.Sandstones and I fractured volcanic rocks in deeper portions. Recharge Source Ditch and canal leakage.Percolation Deep percolation of surface water from streams on alluvial I E of surface water from streams on alluvial fans along the periphery of the valley where the clay fans along the periphery of the valley where layers are not present. I the clay layers are not present. Yield Up to 1,500 gpm on the west side of the valley. From 50 gpm to over 3,000 gpm in the southern and Typically 50 to 700 gpm in the central and western parts of the valley. g eastern parts of the valley. dS Water Quality Usually acceptable for potable use, although Typically acceptable for potable use. E in localized areas of the central valley,nitrate, sodium,and total dissolved solids are ^ unacceptably high. Source: Colorado Department of Natural Resources= Rio Grande Basin Facts - 4 ) ) } Rio Grande Basin •� I r W 4 E S' _ j « Municipality ., t A CWCB Loan Construction Protect 3 V Water Export from Basin Sagf �� / '� Water Import into Basin , �,.:• { ` • :. Highway 7 Major Stream or River y J�"/}+.t'e�,o Instream Flow Reach `, Mo a I . Designated Flood Plain �•-' 1 }/ . Major Lake or Reservoir M.. h> rr'�� 1 I .. of '.��U�' 1ry County DE Basin " '''',',‘... I:jr,..::', 'C' evade, 1` ,.1...t--:,,,` D :. y r .,,,f. ....,;..9 •H ins :ft ,.� 1. Str m Gage- ter .,`'l : r ,:: }•f . I • \ tie Del gHoope :,,,-4,,.,:.41,::,:, +rl 3 outtf Fcl , , 7 1, i� ........ V, 3 i 1 �r Y ,-1 ) ,-;-: . d,,,,„v,,,, ,,, . ... .,_ ., 1-,,,,,.... -, --_ , , ,-, /) arno91 )A' 4.-- .. .. „ Py` ' l''' a /;;-",,,,,‘ .; ')-\.:\ :„,...:... 4C"...--7 •} �'' a ' '-- 4-`for w > SCOSH IIc' �` i-t QS ." Romeo :. San s. .. nassa Zeg Since 1971. the CWCB has provided mom than Anton) s'r batos • .`` $12 million in financing for 10 water projects in thifr\ks i yc am nck f• , �� basin.Projects receiving over$5QO,�Qinfrnancirtg CUmb Lr RioGrancle Fli ~`�� am shown on the map as a red triangle A A. •� , I near Lobatos '� l Rio Grande Basin Facts - 5 .,,, R C[)1tT$ ,,\t... -6tito----7...1--;,, Yampa and White River Basin Facts Q i > Coloradc: Water Conservation Board March 2002 c,, :N y'.� Walden aGrsslry �s'soir t z� %,':,a� iT 's i r f):.-..7%c+ 4 .•Glenwood a Denver - .. .• �'. £ e °n Grand Springs Burlington -c Bill Owens Junction .caaredo Governor Springs rin a G,.nniion ' Greg Welcher •Pueblo •��e DNR Executive Director Ala a TM•- .•Durango Rod Kuharich . ., CWCB Director Overview ,4 ° , , n; r ,. David H. Smith The White and Yampa River Basins "" F br- CWCB Member, :,4at•- - Yarnpa/White drain the northwest corner of the state. ' River Basin Development of the basin yield is Fishhook Lake (Photo courtesy of Bill Green) limited by interstate compacts with other Colorado River Basin States. Conservation and "0th Major tributaries to the Yampa include the Little Snake,Williams Fork,Elk and Conservancy Districts : The basins are comprised of all or Bear Rivers as well as Fortification and Water Conservation Districts parts of four counties. Between Elkhcacl Creeks. Major tributaries to Colorado River 1990 and 2000,population in these 'le White include Piceance,Snell, basins increased by 24 percent,and Ripple,Marline,Big Fish,Miller,Flag, Water Conservancy Districts PP g• now accounts for 0.9 percent of the Little Beaver, and Big Beaver Creeks; Great Northern : .':: . state's total population. The graph and the North and South Forks of the Juniper belowan for lists population the White. An average of 2.2 million acre- Savory Pot Hook portions of the counties that are in feet leaves the state via these two river Upper Yampa these basins. systems each year. This represents Yellow Jacket :.;,;s:•.. 21 percent of the total Clow leaving the Rio Blanco state. The major water use in the basins is irrigation,with diversions of ap Yampa and White River Basin Population by County proximately 7i$),000 acre-feet annually 2s— ,.. for the irrigation of 113,00(acres. Total Basin Population •ACM 1990 31800 ..: .... :(. � ' 20-. April 2000 Posent 6ramth a 247. :: Surface Water Diversions in Acre-feet by Use § 15 �..�'''r 1998(AF) 199s(AF) � 1U IIIIIgr: Dlrrigation 719,124 732,424 ■Storage 9 2.132 1,213 (Municipal 8,103 8,324 s „ Dlndustrial 5460 4111 ■Transbasin 3,643 2,768 t,•-' ['Stock 31.072 30,755 0 co II Fish 35,227 23,194 rQo ° o° �2 ID PowerPower 525,649 541,768 c'a • Total 1.352,120 1,361,950 Source. Colorado Department of Local Affairs Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Division 6 Annual Ir. Additional information about these river basins is Reports. 1996-1998 ,, available at htto://cwcb.state.co.us Major Storage Projects Major Water Rights Calls Water rights calls in the\White and Yampa Basins occur ---r Reservoir Normal only on internally controlled tributaries where irrigation Storage demands can exceed stream flows, such as Bear River; (acre-feet) Piceance Creek; Fortification Creek; and North,?fiddle and South Hunt Creeks. On the mainstems there Stagecoach Reservoir 33,275 historically has not been administration of water right Willow Creek Reservoir 23,064 (Steamboat Lake) calls and water has been available for appropriation. Taylor Draw Reservoir 13,800 Groundwater use is minimal and them is no adtninistra- tion of wells in the basins. Future admnistration of the Elkhead Creek Reservoir 13,500 Yamcolo Reservoir 9 580 Y \W Yampa and 'hite may be affected by activities and projects in the Recoven-Program for Endangered Fish. Big Beaver Reservoir(Lake Avery) 7,658 Stillwater Reservoir 6,088 Source: Office of the Division 6 Engineer # Source: Colorado Division of Water Resources Office of Dam t r -$ l ' L ection Safety Database There are 132 instream flow segments totalling approxi- mately 704 stream miles in these basins. There are also 14 lakes with decreed natural lake levels. These decreed r i r water rights are held by the C\W'CB to "protect the natural environment to a reasonable degree." The decreed flow or lake level for each of these instream Yampa River near Maybell,Colorado flow segments and natural lakes is based on the flow or 20,000 lake level required to maintain the water-dependent 18.000 Average Annual Discharge: 1,138,8 AF DAvg.Year 48 natural environment. 1 fi.000 Minimum Annual Discharge: 345,138 a(1977) ■Max.Year Y Maximum Annual Discharge: 2,198,881 AF(1984) Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board vs 14,000 ❑Min.Year 8 d 12,000 Extreme p'-"'"�J,Qp k '''''j g..,., e''$ &a.6 10.000 t...•"4 &.r&... ( @ YY�.. # o"e£'₹I�'a 1 8,000 s y saxGage Maximum Minimum A.000 Recorded Recorded 2.000 Flow(cfs) Flow(cfs) Yampa near Maybell 24,400 (1984) 2(1934) Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep White below Meeker 6,060 (1983) 85 (1977) Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports White River below Meeker,Colorado r 4 4.500 4000 - Average Annual Discharge: 481,25➢AF nava.Ym W Minimum Annual Discharge 210,,058AF(197n e e `,,°xg £ fi 3,500 - Maximum Annual Discharge. 775,785 AF(1984) MMax.Vor 3.000 . ❑Min.Vw " ._ E°1.asea x"�e 703.44l/r. �^" �,y } 1t, a'a }... . 2,1' e:'—::::— a 2.500 - ei 4r £ 2,000 . a 1,500 - jYRh"'g e.3., S .A, P a 1.000 - a so0 1 I � - Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep �. ey � ee ,y a r a4 c sta' � re ¢ Source: U.S. Geological Survey Water Data Reports Trapper Lake (Photo courtesy of Barbara Goodrich) Yampa & White River Basin Facts - 2) ea,4%amyl , Major imports into the Basin None • t 'i£.'A t # turn • E SgI rr;"asl Name Diversions (acre-feet) 1* Stillwater Ditch 2,446 2 Sarvis Ditch 973 3 Dome Creek Ditch 232 ' Total 3,651 " Numbers in the above table correspond to numbers that accompany arrows on the basin map (p. 5). Source Division 6 1998 Annual Report, 10-year averages eltiose 7k Creek (Photo courtesy of Barbara Goodrich) ate_ Even'year, Colorado experiences at least one 100-yearf.4/01/2.21.Faf4a05'..:-414-?flj$ 4.40 .° flood somewhere in the state. Colorado's total flood losses to date have been documented to be$4.9 billion. `° " `'s- The basins'most recent major flood event was Trapper Lake (Photo courtesy of Barbara Goodrich) May 30 June 5, 1997. The estimated total historic flood damages for these basins have been$5.5 million to date. Winter 1974 Ice Jam floods Meeker to Rangley White River; May-June 1974 Dry Avg Wet Upper Basins flood Jan-Feb 1960 May 1984 Ice Jam floods Yampa River Little Snake River floods ��pp yypp. yypp........ .......___ u yp y�q.�.�.�, W_W �p _.__.. 5.p.,.........5.¢..,....._..-.ypI �p_w..._.._.._ _g__._... .._...._....,rp,.....,_...w...-... o u:'1 4 6 G S G C iF C 4 44, is fh LS t% IB Source. Colorado Water Conservation Board and Division 6 Staff Yampa & White River Basin Facts - W3 Endangered Compact Facts Spec i e S Colorado River Compact of 1922 !� Allocates 7.5 million acre-feet (maf) of consumptive use annually to (1) the Under the Endangered Species Act, Upper Colorado River Basin (those parts of Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, four Colorado River native fish species Utah, Wyoming, and Arizona above Lee Ferry, Arizona) and (2) the Lower are listed as endangered: Colorado Colorado River Basin (those parts of Arizona, California, Nevada, New Mexico pikeminnow (a.k.a. Colorado squaw- fish),humpback chub, bonytail chub, and Utah below Lee Ferry, Arizona).This Compact requires the Upper Colo- rado River Basin to deliver an average of 75 maf to the Lower Basin during and razorback sucker. Causes for the decline of these spec es include alter- use by 1.0 maf in the future. any consecutive 10-year period. The Lower Basin may increase its consumptive anon of stream flows by water projects, introduction of non-native Rio Grande, Colorado and Tijuana Treaty of 1944 between the United species and efforts to remove the native fish from the system in the past. States and Mexico Guarantees delivery of 1.5 maf of Colorado River water per year to Mexico. In 1988, the States of Colorado, Utah If there is not adequate surplus water to satisfy the obligation,the Upper and Lower Basins are to equally share the burden of reducing uses to make up any deficiencies. and \C'com rig; water users; hydro- power customers; environmental Upper Colorado River Basin Compact of 1948 organizations; and federal agencies Allocates the Upper Basin consumptive use of water as follows: developed a program to recover these Arizona 50,000 acre-feet/year species while allowing water use and Colorado 51.75% development to continue. The Recov- Utah 23% err- Program for Endangered Fish of the Upper Colorado River Basin is Wyoming 14% New Mexico designed to achieve recovery by ..11.25.70 1) improving flow conditions by Additionally;the State of Colorado may not deplete the flow in the Yampa River adding water to the river when needed below an aggregate of 5 maf over any 10-year period. by the fish, (2) improving and devloping habitat, (3) reducing non- Depending upon the interpretation of the Compacts,other laws,and the amount of water in,the river,Colorado's right to the consumptive use of water under the native fish populations,and (4) Bevel Compacts may range from 3.079 maf to 3.853 maf per year. Colorado currently oping native fish stocking programs consumes an average of 2.3 maf per year with facilities in place using up to 2.6 maf. Implementation of the Recovery Program should allow Colorado to Colorado's apportionment has not been divided among the various sub-basins fully develop its entitlement to water within the state. The Yampa and La Plata River Basins have specific delivery obligations under the Compacts. The allocation and administration of any surpluses under the compact and shortages under the Compacts within Colorado remain open to discussion but Source: Colorado Water Conservation Board ultimately will be subject to determination and administration by the State Engineer. Unique CuniemP Charactensticc Water is available for appropriation on lengthy reaches of • the mainstems. Minimal volume of in basin storage. A Water rights administration is limited to internally controlled tributaries. Water administration is centralized in the Division 6 office in Steamboat Springs, but water rights adjudication takes place in Division 5 Water Court in Glenwood Springs for the White and Green River(Photo courtesy of Dennis McQuillan) -Division 6 Water Court in Steamboat Springs for the Yampa. Yampa & White River Basin Facts — 4 ) ) 1 Yampa and White River Bas i n N r�i,-.r .- ,,, 4 r j L y,♦ �^y��.s . • ....,.. ,r4 ...., _ ‘'') ♦ . I] s Strewn a ge- { - a ...4N Yainpr ivet- tM..,r"!r to t ' 4 E/D os 1 --� �^ 11) C3 i I ,--. „. )fs+'-- ) .,,,,r . r 3 Stream Gam/ ( 13. White. ver .4 1 \ � • Municipality ‘) o . /1,,, a.."-71 ) (i _ZL__d _____ 7 \ CWCB Loan Construction Project ca 1 ,', y Water Export from Basin 1 13 ^'�- Highway Major Stream or River Instream Flow Reach ...--," {� i� t Designated Flood Plain 1 f!f Major Lake or Reservoir n\-11J County 1 ) 1 I—I CWCB Basin Since 1971, the CWCB has provided more than$12 million in financing for 10 water projects in these basins. Projects 10 o to Zo Miles receiving over$500,000 in financing are shown on the map as a red triangle A. Yampa & White River Basin Facts S Hello