Pending issues on Colorado, Gunnison could complicate future water use

 


Published/Last Modified on Saturday, April 29, 2006 7:25 PM MDT

Readers’ Choice

Matt Hildner

Daily Press Writer

Advertisement
MONTROSE —The phrase is simple.

“First in time, first in right.”

Yet the phrase, which is used to describe one of the basic tenets of how water is allocated under Colorado law, belies the difficulty of divvying up one of the region’s most precious resources.

Water rights in Colorado and the rest of the intermountain West are allocated according to the doctrine of prior appropriation.

The doctrine controls who uses how much water, the types of use and when those waters can be used.

Simply put, under the prior appropriation doctrine, the first person to appropriate water from a stream, put it to use, and have that right approved or adjudicated by the local water court, has priority over any of the other water rights that follow at a later date.

In times of shortage, if a water user is not receiving the allotment called for by his water right, he can file a “call” with the state water engineer. If approved by the state engineer, the call prohibits junior water users upstream from diverting water, so the senior water right can be filled.

According to Frank Kugel, state division engineer for the Gunnison River Basin, calls on the Uncompahgre River are not uncommon.

“We generally have shortages on the Uncompahgre every other year on a long-term average,” he said.

Calls on the Gunnison River are less common, however.

“We had a call in 2002 and 2003 by the Gunnison Tunnel,” Kugel said. “Prior to that (the last call) was 1977.”

The Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Association is the entity that manages the tunnel’s operation and the 575 miles of canals and laterals that carry water to 80,000 acres of farmland around Montrose, Olathe and Delta.

The tunnel has a priority date of 1904 for its right to divert 1,300 cubic feet per second (cfs) out of the Gunnison River. The UVWA also holds other free flow rights on the Uncompahgre River dating back to 1882 for 652 cfs.

One cubic foot of water per second, which is the standard measurement for flowing water, equals 7.48 gallons per second.

UVWA Manager Marc Catlin said his organization rarely makes a call.

“In most times, we don’t make a call unless we’re really short,” he said. Really short for UVWA means that it is delivering 90 percent or less of a farmer’s water to his fields and the gauge at the end of Uncompahgre River near Delta is running at 100 cfs or less.

Cities in good shape

While agriculture uses the lion’s share of the area’s water, towns and cities in the Uncompahgre Valley have benefitted from a stable host of water rights, most of which are held under the Dallas Creek Reclamation Project, which is managed by the Tri-County Water Conservancy District.

The project, which includes the water storage of 84,410 acre feet (af) in Ridgway Dam, has 28,000 af available for municipal and industrial use, which is treated by the Project 7 Water Authority before it’s delivered to domestic supply systems.

Montrose is under contract for 10,000 af per year from the Dallas Project. Add that to the shares the city owns in the Cimarron Canal and Reservoir Company and the city has legal access to 13,000 af, though Attorney John Kappa, counsel to the city of Montrose, said the city consumed only 3,000 af last year.

That cushion means securing more water rights is not a worry for the city.

“I personally doubt whether we’ll ever need to acquire any more,” said Kappa, who retired as the full-time city attorney in 1998.

The city of Delta also benefits from the Dallas Creek Project, holding a contract for 3,700 af from the facility. That water is in addition to the 3,500 af the city pulls from sources on the Grand Mesa.

Delta Utility Director Fay Mathews said that although the Grand Mesa supply is not used as drinking water, it’s been decreed for municipal use.

“I think we’ve got pretty good breathing room,” he said.

Situation on Gunnison, Colorado Could Change

In 2001, the federal government filed to quantify its right to instream flows on the Gunnison River as it goes through the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park.

The government requested a flow rate that varies based upon the hydrologic conditions and the time of year. At times, the peak flows for the park would be increased to represent conditions on the river before dams existed to regulate the flow.

According to the Park Service’s application for the right, the higher peak flows would control riparian vegetation, keep sediment from settling in the river bed, and improve fish habitat.

In 2003, the U.S. Department of the Interior, which oversees the Park Service, signed an agreement with the state that would have reduced the flows requested in the original application.

That settlement was appealed in federal court by a coalition of five environmental groups and the effort to quantify the right in state court has been stayed pending the outcome of the federal appeal.

UVWA’s Catlin worries that the attempt to replicate spring flood flows through the canyon could harm the diversion structure used to draw water into the Gunnison Tunnel.

He also said large peak flows could have a negative impact on Blue Mesa Reservoir.

“In the drought of 2002, the Blue Mesa was the shock absorber that allowed everyone in western Colorado to have water,” Catlin said.

The struggle for water on the Colorado River might also affect area water users someday.

Under the 1922 Colorado River Compact, the upper basin states, including Colorado, are required to send 75 million af downstream every decade.

The upper basin has used Lake Powell in northern Arizona as a holding tank to regulate flows to the lower basin states.

When Powell’s water levels dropped dramatically during the drought that hit the region earlier this decade, it raised the prospect that the upper basin states would have to reduce their water usage to meet downstream demand.

Although the seven basin states reached a preliminary agreement on in February on how to regulate the river’s flow, Kugel said inside Colorado, the state is still trying to determine how the Colorado River’s tributaries, which include both the Gunnison and the Uncompahgre, would contribute to a call for water from the lower basin.

Contact Matt Hildner via e-mail at matth@montrosepress.com
 

¤ Please read our Disclaimer and Privacy Policy before participating in our online community.

Comments

    marqthompson wrote on Feb 1, 2010 3:21 AM:

    " This is a wonderful article. The things given are unanimous and needs to be appreciated by everyone.
    --------
    marqthompson
    Noosa real estate "

    Kaitlyn Heichel wrote on Nov 3, 2009 2:01 PM:

    " My dad was Robert Heichel and i just wanted to thank again everyone that helped looked for him. It was over 3 years ago that he died, but i will never forget him. I think about him still every single day and life without him is so hard. Thank you everyone who spent time looking for him. I wish this could have been a happy ending but life isn't fair. My dad died when i was 12 and i am now almost 16. Thank you again for everything you guys have done. Your amazing. "

    Sarah Bond wrote on Jul 13, 2009 5:31 PM:

    " It really makes me sick that people lie about certain events to make themselves look better than they really are... Just to set the record straight, one of those stories is extremely false. Email me if you want the real story from the person who was actually there. "


Post a comment


READER COMMENTS 

• Be respectful of others, the writer and the subjects in the story.

• Be relevant. Keep your comments on point. 

• See the guidelines for TalkAbout. Perhaps your comment is best for that community forum, available from the home page, instead of commenting on a particular story.

Comment posters are responsible for the opinions they express and the accuracy of the information they provide. We urge comment writers to treat this as a public forum where manners matter. We encourage a collegial, non-insulting tone. All readers comments must be approved by our staff before posting to the Web site. Be aware, in accordance with the Communications Decency Act and provisions upheld in judicial appeal, that you are responsible for comments posted on this Web site. Montrose Press is not liable for messages from third parties.

DO NOT POST:
* Potentially libelous statements or damaging innuendo.
* Obscene, explicit, or racist language.
* Personal attacks, insults or threats.
* The use of another person's real name to disguise your identity.
* Comments unrelated to the story.

Opinions, advice and all other information expressed in montrosepress.com's reader comments represent the individual's own views and not necessarily those of the Montrose Press. Montrose Press does not endorse and is not responsible for statements, advice or opinions offered by anyone other than authorized Montrose Press spokespersons.

Thank you for your comments!

(optional)