Background

On September 30, 2021, the Division of Water Resources (“DWR”), without notice to any affected parties, built a dam of rocks and sticks across the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch where the stream exits a narrow canyon in approximately the SW1/4 NW1/4 of Section 18, Township 11 South, Range 80 West of the 6th P.M. (the “Upper Dam”). DWR posted an order signed by the Division Engineer on the Upper Dam indicating that DWR considers water flowing east to be an unnamed diversion that is out-of-priority and prohibited interference with the structure.

Approximately forty yards downstream, DWR built another dam of rocks to direct any remaining flow in the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch back to the West Fork (the “Lower Dam”) and posted a similar order on that structure (collectively, the “Dams”). The effect of the Dams is that the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch has dried up and no longer feeds the Beaver Ponds on the Smith property or the lake on AngelView property. However, the evidence is overwhelming that the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch is a natural stream channel, not a diversion or a ditch.

The East Fork of Bartlett Gulch is a natural stream channel:

Water was naturally hitting the Upper Dam and already flowing under it. Field investigations conducted on October 12-13 clearly showed water hitting the Upper Dam and flowing under the Upper Dam down the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch. The stream hit a steep bank directly opposite and upstream of the Upper Dam and was redirected toward the Upper Dam. Without the Upper Dam, most of the water would have naturally flowed down this channel. This is evidence that even at low flows Bartlett Gulch has flowed east and suggests that the Upper Dam will not survive runoff in the spring.

There are many natural channels at and below the Dams. The October 12-13 field investigations by Angelview, Smith, and DWR revealed that as Bartlett Gulch exits the steeper ravine and hits flatter, unconsolidated materials, it has created multiple natural channels similar to an alluvial fan. These channels exist at and below the Dams and would naturally carry water depending on runoff conditions. One natural channel carrying water to the east,and one carrying water to the West, were steeply cut and well armored. Other channels likely carry water during high flow periods. Further, the East Fork parallels the West Fork for approximately a quarter mile, which suggests that it is not an unnatural diversion given the amount of work it would take to build such a structure in challenging terrain so close to the existing stream.

USGS Maps show Bartlett Gulch flowing east for nearly a century. Five USGS maps show Bartlett Gulch flowing east dating back to 1935. The 1935 map shows Bartlett Gulch flowing in two perennial channels, the East and West Forks. The 1967 map also shows a perennial channel flowing in the East Fork and an additional intermittent channel between the two forks. The 1983 map shows a perennial channel in the East Fork without a corresponding West Fork. The 1994 and 2016 maps also show a perennial stream in the East Fork with an intermittent channel flowing in the West Fork through Twin Lakes. These five maps all show a perennial channel in the East Fork, which is evidence that it has been the primary channel for 86 years.

Lidar data confirms multiple channels, including the East Fork. A lidar map shows many channels in the unconsolidated material below the Upper Dam and above the Smith property, which is consistent with field observations. It also shows a deeper channel following the East Fork toward the Smith and Angelview properties.

Geological features indicate that Bartlett Gulch has flowed east for thousands of years. The Twin Lakes area was heavily glaciated. Mr. Bill Berg, a geologist, was present during the October 12-13 site investigations. Mr. Berg highlighted geological features from the glaciated era that demonstrate Bartlett Gulch flowing east. One such feature was an esker (ridges of sand and gravel left by sub-glacial streams) that demonstrated that a stream underneath a glacier flowed east toward the Smith and Angelview properties. This is evidence of natural stream flow to the east for thousands of years.

Fen wetlands on the Angelview property further indicate the existence of considerable water for over 1000 years. An October 2018 report by Birch Ecology concludes that there are three wetlands on the Angelview property, including two fen wetlands. Fens are fed by groundwater upwelling. Fens form over thousands of years and require considerable water. The terrain around Angelview is largely dry. The fact that there are fens on the Angelview property suggests groundwater charged by the East Fork has fed these fens for thousands of years.

The beaver ponds on the Smith property have existed for at least many decades.There is an approximately eight-acre complex of beaver ponds on the Smith property. They appear on the 1967 USGS map, which is evidence of longstanding flows in the East Fork.

The East Fork’s capacity to deliver water to Twin Lakes is greater than the West Fork. Although the two forks of Bartlett Gulch start off similar, the East Fork discharges into a large wetland basin devoid of any trees (live or dead), suggesting that the water has long been transported that way. The West Fork is more confined and comes into the Town of Twin Lakes with little to no capacity to manage higher flows.

Culverts below the East Fork have a much greater capacity to safely deliver Bartlett Gulch flows to Twin Lakes without flooding the Town. There are 7 culverts that are capable of delivering East Fork flows under Highway 82 to Twin Lakes whereas there is only one culvert that can deliver flows from the Town to Twin Lakes. Those culverts were depicted in CDOT’s 1976 plans. Field investigations confirmed a significant difference in culvert capacity and the ability of wetlands on either side of Highway 82 to absorb flows. Simply, the culverts on the West Fork do not have the capacity to carry all of Bartlett Gulch’s flows safely.

Wetlands adjacent to Twin Lakes are fed by the East Fork of Bartlett Gulch. An approximately fifteen-acre wetland connected to Twin Lakes is immediately across Highway 82 from the Angelview property and is fed by the East Fork. This large wetland complex is evidence of long-term, high-volume flows feeding it from the East Fork.

Flooding and erosion happening NOW demonstrate that the West Fork did not historically handle all of Bartlett Gulch’s flows. The flows directed into the West Fork by the Dams are already causing problems.
A County Rd. 26 culvert is being undercut by the redirected flows.
Further down the West Fork, a mature stand of live aspen trees is flooded, which is clear evidence that the West Fork did not historically carry all that water. The aspen trees were estimated to be about 70 years old. Aspen cannot live in submerged conditions.
Beaver ponds above the village are capturing a large volume of the new West Fork flows directly above the Village and pose a flooding risk.
Flooding risks and elevated groundwater tables also compound the risk of septic failure in the Village.
Water Commissioner Sutton even commented that if all flows were directed toward the Village it would be flooded during a previous site visit on May 17, 2019, which makes the September 30, 2021 Dams even harder to explain.
The flooding and risks were observed during the October 12-13 field investigations, which occurred during a low flow period.
The flows in the West Fork as they come into Town were being partially diverted more to the east during the October 12-13 site visit which probably was minimizing the flooding at the culvert in Town. Yet, the property owner where the diversion exists recently complained that even the low flows that exist now are jeopardizing his property.

The Village of Twin Lakes would not exist if all of Bartlett Gulch flowed through it. Had 100% of the flows of Bartlett Gulch historically flowed down the West Fork as Mr. Sutton determined, it would be highly unlikely that the Town of Twin Lakes would have been built in the path of such flooding and on top of the elevated ground watertable.