AGENDA ITEM #Sb
COLORJ\DO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD
215 State Services Building
1525 Sherman Street
Denver 3, Colorado
March 8, 1963
M E M O R A N D U M
TO:
Members, Colorado Water Conservation Board and Colorado
Water Investigation Commission.
FROM:
L. R. Kuiper, Acting Director.
SUBJECT: Agenda Item #Sb, the Trinidad Project.
Subsequent to dictating my report of the Acting Director
for the March 13th Board meeting, it has come to the attention of
this office that further problems have developed in connection
with the Trinidad Project.
Mr. Mills Bunger on February 28, 1963, met with the
Regional Director of Region 7, U.
s.
Bureau of Reclamation to pre
sent to the Regional Director a substitute proposal. Mr. Bunger
was accompanied by two members of the Model Irrigation District
Board of Directors. This alternate proposal has been presented
on at least three different occasions when this writer was in
attendance at various meetings. It seems that each time there is
a change in personnel in Region 7, Mr. Bunger again makes this
proposal. Each time in the past this writer has advised people
in attendance at the meeting that the Board made its policy known
in a statement accompanying the project report by the Secretary of
the Army to the 84th Congress, 2nd Session, on January 30, 1956.
This report was presented to the Committee on Public Works of the
House of Representatives as House Document No. 325.
Mr. Bunger, together with various and sundry other in
terested agencies, has been repeatedly advised that the staff of
this Board has studied his proposal; has conferred with represent
atives of the Bureau of Reclamation and of the Corps of Engineers
with regard to his proposal; has conferred with representatives of
the Bureau of Reclamation with regard to the economic feasibility
of his proposal; has discussed his proposal with the Arkansas River
Compact Administration and with representatives of the Arkansas
Valley Ditch Association; and that as a result of these confer-ences and studies has not, and does not now, see fit to recommend to the Colorado Water Conservation Board that its position as ex-pressed in the letter referred to above be changed.
As a result of this last effort by Mr. Bunger the Bureau of Reclamation is planning to suspend studies on final economic
feasibility of this project and that as a result of this suspension by the Bureau of Reclamation, the Corps of Engineers will also
suspend further design activity. Such suspensions would be tragic. The City of Trinidad desperately needs the flood protection pro-vided by this project and the irrigated area in the vicinity of Trinidad desperately needs the firmed up water supply which this project would provide.
I t has been agreed with representatives of the Purgatoire Water Conservancy District that the Conservancy District encourage Mr. Bunger to make his presentation to the Colorado Water Conser-vation Board at its regular meeting on March 13, 1963. This
pre-sentation would be made under the heading "New Business".
In order to bring the Board up to date on the status of this project, the following quotations from House Document No. 325 are provided herewith:
"12. Subject to the following conditions, the State
of Colorado approves the proposed Trinidad Project as described in the review report:
A. The project shall at all times be operated in accordance with the water laws of the State;
B. The project shall be operated under conditions (a), (b), and (c) of paragraph 7 above until such time as operation under other conditions might be found
feasible under State law and the Arkansas River compact; C. In order to minimize the effects of the proj-ect on water users below the projproj-ect area with priority rights junior to those of the project ditches, and to assure minimum depletion by the project of the water supply available to John Martin Reservoir, the
follow-ing
principles of operation of the Trinidad Reservoir will be observed:(a) Storage in the reservoir under the transferred and rehabilitated Model right of only such water as would accrue
-2-to that right under the present s-2-torage decrees of inlet canals to the Model Reservoir.
(b) Storage of winter flows in lieu of diversions for winter irrigation.
(c) Storage of flood flows originating on Purgatoire River above the Trinidad Dam site at only such times as i t may be definitely determined that such flows would otherwise spill from John Martin Reservoir.
(d) The passing of all other flows through the reser-voir at the maximum possible rates compatible with preven-tion of bank caving in the river channel belCM the reservoir.••
"7. (Referred to above). The United States Bureau of Reclamation has made studies relative to the use of the 55,000 acre-feet of irrigation storage and suggests 5 oper-ating conditions as follows:
(a) Transfer of the storage decree of the Model Land and Irrigation Company for 20,000 acre-feet annually, from the present site to the proposed Trinidad Reservoir.
(b) Storage in Trinidad Reservoir of flood flows originating on Purgatoire River above the darn site which would otherwise spill from John Martin Reservoir.
(c} Storage in Trinidad Reservoir of the winter flows of Purgatoire River historically diverted for winter irri-gation of project lands.
(d) Regulation in Trinidad Reservoir of summer flows historically diverted to project lands provided that future stream flow records disclose such further regulation would not result in material depletion of the flow now available to John Martin Reservoir; or that any material increase in depletion be compensated by suitable replacement to lands served by John Martin Reservoir.
(e) Storage in Trinidad Reservoir of all flood flows originating on Purgatoire River above the reservoir other than those specified in condition (b) provided that suitable replacement is made to John Martin Reservoir to the extent that such storage in Trinidad Reservoir would result in material depletion of the inflow from Purgatoire River and
-3-interfere with its operation as established by the Arkansas River compact.~
In studies of economic feasibility conducted by the Bureau of Reclamation i t has been determined that the 55,000 acre-feet of conservation storage proposed in the original report cannot be justified at this time. Therefore, the current Bureau plan
proposes the 20,000 acre-feet (Model Land and Irrigation Company decree) be the extent of the conservation storage at this time. This amount can be economically justified.
At previous meetings with the corps of Engineers, the Bureau of Reclamation, and the Purgatoire Water Conservancy Dis-trict, i t was proposed that the State of Colorado would participate in a cooperative stream gaging program to determine whether or not further storage could be justified in the Trinidad Reservoir in accordance with the limitations set forth in paragraphs 12 and 7 of House Document No. 325. Should such be the case, as determined by future operations, i t would then be possible, at some later date, to construct debris basin type structures upstream from the Trinidad Reservoir so that i t would be possible to transfer stor-age now dedicated to silt retention to conservation storstor-age. The Corps of Engineers and the Bureau of Reclamation have agreed that such a procedure would be wise and that they would participate in such studies should they prove meritorious. The Soil Conservation Service has also indicated that they would be interested in cooper-ating in such a proposal. With this in mind, i t would, therefore, be possible at some later date to expand the conservation storage by transferring the silt retention obligation to an upstream
struc-ture.
It is the firm opinion of the staff of this Board that any departure from the conditions set forth in paragraphs 12 and 7 pf House Document No. 325 would result in objection by the Arkansas Valley Ditch Association and by the State of Kansas
(through the Arkansas River Compact Administration) to the trans-fer of the place of storage of the Model Land and Irrigation Com-pany's storage decree. Without this transfer the project is dead.
LRK:lk
