The Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) and San Juan Water Conservancy District (SJWCD) boards of directors discussed the management of the Running Iron Ranch and the results of a March 24 joint work session at their recent meetings.
On April 10, the PAWSD board discussed the ranch, with then-chairman Jim Smith providing a recap of the March joint session.
Smith explained that the group looked at the situation at the ranch and agreed that they would not water at the ranch this year.
He added that, from information he gathered, it appeared that there would be no cattle run this year on the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) property adjacent to the ranch, making fence repairs less urgent.
However, he explained that the group agreed that fencing off certain areas of the ranch to ensure cattle do not damage the irrigation ditches would be valuable.
Smith stated that the weeds on the property need to be sprayed, which he stated would cost about $4,000 overall.
He added that, if weed spraying was to occur, the district needed to notify Archuleta County Weed and Pest Director Ethan Proud so that he could schedule a time to spray the property.
The board expressed agreement for setting a date to have weeds sprayed, potentially in June.
PAWSD board member Glenn Walsh pointed out that the property has not been sprayed for several years.
Smith noted that the previous tenants were supposed to spray for weeds as part of their lease to run cattle on the property, but that this had not occurred.
“A lot didn’t happen,” Walsh said.
PAWSD District Engineer/Manager Justin Ramsey commented that this decision would have to be coordinated with the SJWCD.
Walsh replied that the PAWSD board could make a recommendation and, if the SJWCD agrees, it could move forward.
Otherwise, they could hold a meeting to discuss the issue, Walsh added.
Smith added that the group discussed letting water go down to ranches lower down on the Park Ditch system since irrigation would not happen at the Running Iron Ranch this year.
Walsh expressed support for this approach.
PAWSD board member Bill Hudson, who was at the joint work session along with Smith, commented that the group agreed at the meeting that fixing the fence is important, but that, with the information Smith found, it likely did not need to be done this year.
Smith commented that fence repairs were not in the budget and that the costs could be up to $16,000, with a cost of $5,000 per mile for materials and $2 per foot for installation.
Ramsey asked how the district wants to approach tearing down a residence on the property that has been attracting squatters.
In response to a question from Smith, Ramsey explained that Andy Weber offered to tear down the building for $30,000.
Hudson asked how widely the need to hire a company to tear down the house was advertised.
Ramsey replied it was not advertised at all.
Walsh commented that the task should be put out to bid, since it is fairly straightforward.
PAWSD board member Alex Boehmer proposed that the district could offer the house to the Pagosa Fire Protection District (PFPD) for it to burn down.
Ramsey explained that PAWSD did this and that the opportunity was turned down.
Walsh commented that it might be done for a price, adding, “I understand that, you would think, in a spirit of cooperation, it might be done for zero but if the best bid we can get is $21,000 and the fire department says … we can do it for …”
Ramsey noted that the work would involve more than burning the building, including moving the burned material to the dump and filling in the hole left behind.
He added that the PFPD appeared unwilling to do the burn at all in previous meetings, regardless of price.
Walsh noted that the district would likely have material available at the ranch for filling in the house site.
Smith concluded his summary by commenting that the work session was a “good meeting.”
PAWSD board member Gene Tautges noted that bidding for the demolition would also require SJWCD approval.
At the SJWCD meeting on April 14, SJWCD president Candace Jones updated the board on the events of the PAWSD meeting and issues with managing the ranch.
Jones commented that the district needs to understand if there will be any consequences for not irrigating at the ranch this year or any documentation the district would need to complete.
She stated that she does not believe that the district was “opposed in principle” to letting downstream users use water from the ranch, but that the district needs to understand any implications this would have in the future.
SJWCD board member and former Colorado State University Extension agent Bill Nobles pointed out that there would likely be very little water in the ditch this summer due to poor snow levels this winter.
He added that letting others use the water for one year would not threaten the district’s water right.
SJWCD legal counsel Jeffrey Kane commented that temporary non-use would not cause abandonment of the right.
Nobles expressed support for allowing others to use the water.
SJWCD board member Charles Riehm proposed that the district could ask users to forgive its dues to the ditch company in exchange for using the water.
SJWCD board member Rod Proffitt expressed opposition to Riehm’s suggestion, commenting that, if the district pays its dues, it is showing its intent to keep the water rights.
“OK, I give up,” Riehm said.
Later in the meeting, the board discussed fencing at the Running Iron Ranch.
Riehm provided a brief summary, explaining that the discussion focused on if the property should be fenced to prevent the irrigation ditch on the property from being damaged.
He stated that the group discussed a variety of options for fencing, but that the discussion “came to naught” because PAWSD did not pursue the issue further.
Jones added that this was also the upshot of the PAWSD meeting and noted that Smith found that there would be no grazing on the adjacent property.
She added that, in light of this, the fence discussion is “moot.”
She then raised the issue of weeds, noting that the districts would have to determine if the county could help them with weed control or if they would have to find another approach.
Jones added that Proud stated at a recent Archuleta County meeting that he was fully booked and would not take on more projects until later in the summer, and potentially not then.
Nobles commented that a fall spray might be more effective given the type of weeds that are present.
Jones commented that it would be valuable to convince Proud to look at the property and provide his input on how to control the weeds.
She then discussed the building demolition at the property, noting that PAWSD directed staff to get bids for the project.
She also noted that the PFPD had turned down burning the building in the past.
Jones and Riehm concluded the discussion by commenting that the demolition issue is currently out of the SJWCD’s hands.
josh@pagosasun.com
