July 23, 2014 Erin Light Division Engineer, Division 6 P.O. Box 773450 Steamboat Springs, CO 80477 Via Email: Erin.Light@state.co.us RE: Meeker Ditch Dear Erin: I am writing to provide information in support of administrative action with respect to the Meeker Ditch. We represent Ken Abbott who owns land below the ditch which has been severely damaged by the waste of water, negligent ditch operations, and failure to maintain the ditch. I understand the Ditch was administered last week and the ditch was substantially curtailed. However, it has since been reopened and evidently is diverting more than it was before and causing severe damage. We have requested Resource Engineering inspect the ditch and relevant aerial photography and have come to the following conclusions and findings: 1. The Meeker Ditch is decreed to carry three water rights: a. The Original Construction was decreed in Civil Action No. 133, Garfield County District Court, for 20.0 cfs. Attachment 1 is the Map and Statement for the Original Construction right. Attachment 2 is an excerpt of the Decree. b. The Fairfield Extension (a/k/a First Enlargement) of the Meeker Ditch was later decreed in Civil Action No. 624, Rio Blanco District Court, for 5.7 cfs. Attachment 3 is the Map and Statement for the First Enlargement Ditch Extension. Attachment 4 is an excerpt of the Decree. c. The Meeker Town-site Ditch, Robbins Enlargement, decreed for 0.25 cfs in Case No. W-2956, Water Division No. 5, for three acres of irrigation and stock water. Attachment 5 contains the original Application containing a map depicting the place of use and the Decree entered. Erin Light, Div. Engineer July 23, 2014 Page 2 2. Very little land is irrigated under the Original Construction water right, which was to irrigate only those lands under the Ditch reflected in the Map and Statement. Resource Engineering estimates no more than 11.9 acres as being irrigated under the Original Construction right (see Attachment 6). The Decree in CA 133 provides for a decreed duty of water of 1 cfs per 50 irrigated acres. Thus no more than 0.25 cfs should be diverted under this water right absent demonstration of additional acreage being historically irrigated and/or a change of water right proceeding being filed and decreed. Water in excess of this amount is contrary to the established decreed duty constituting waste. 3. The First Enlargement right was decreed to irrigate lands identified under the Extension’s Map and Statement. Resource Engineers estimates no more than 108 acres are irrigated under the Fairfield Extension (First Enlargement) of the Meeker Ditch. The Decree in CA 624 does not decree a specific duty of water, although we note that a portion of the lands identified to have been irrigated under this water right appear to be subirrigated. Even under a very liberal duty of water of 1 cfs to 25 acres of land, no more than 4.32 cfs should be diverted under this water right. Water in excess of this amount is contrary to the prohibition against waste. 4. The Ditch lacks an adequate measuring device pursuant to CRS, 37-84-113. 5. The ditch is diverting unnecessary water which is merely being spilled to Sulfur Creek as evidenced by the photo taken July 22, 2014, shown in the Resource Report. 6. The Ditch has not been reasonably and adequately maintained with excessive growth in the ditch and deteriorated bank walls. The requirements of CRS, 37-84-101 are therefore being violated: “The owners of any ditch for irrigation or other purposes shall carefully maintain the embankments thereof so that the waters of such ditch may not flood or damage the premises of others…”. 7. The over-diversion of water at the headgate, reduced carrying capacity of the ditch, and lack of maintenance has caused and continues to cause substantial damages to our client’s business and property. We understand the damage is not confined to our client’s property. The excessive running of water, over that reasonably required for the reasonable application of water to beneficial use for the decreed purposes and lands is forbidden. CRS, 37-84-108 and CRS, 37-84-125. For these reasons, we respectfully request your office take administrative action curtailing diversions to an amount reasonably required for the efficient carriage and irrigation of the lands currently irrigated and which were decreed to be irrigated by the specific water rights described above. Erin Light, Div. Engineer July 23, 2014 Page 3 We appreciate your office’s time and review and are available to answer any questions which you may have. Please do not hesitate to contact Ashley Moffatt at Resource Engineers, or me. Respectfully, Patrick Miller Kropf Noto A Professional Corporation Very truly yours, By: Kevin L. Patrick patrick@waterlaw.com cc: Ken Abbott Ashley Moffatt, Resource Engineering, Inc.