BOARD00054 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

In September U.S. District Court Judge Clarence Brimmer rejected a settlement on the Black Canyon water rights case. The judge remanded the case to the U.S. Park Service, which must decide if it will appeal the decision. . The case began in 2001 when the Park Service filed for a large water right claim on the Gunnison River. The water right, if approved by water court, could have a major impact on water management on the Gunnison. In 2003, a settlement was reached between the state of Colorado and the federal government. Environmental groups sued over the settlement and Brimmer agreed, rejecting the settlement. For the last two weeks, attorneys and water users have read the decision and tried to determine the direction of the case. Local rancher Ken Spann said the Gunnison roundtable has several members who are involved in the litigation and the roundtable could help facilitate a settlement. Other Roundtable members disagree. Bill Trampe said he thought Spann's idea was good but felt the issue was complicated, questioning how one gets involved in something that is already being litigated. Roundtable member Pete Kasper said the case was important to the roundtable but there was work that could be complete while it is being litigated. Reclamaiton Water Resource Chief Dan Crabtree said the agency is still studying the judge's decision and has not made any decision. He said the agency is considering suspending the environmental impact statement on the Gunnison while the case is in litigation. Judge Rules Feds Sbould Have Sougbt More Gunnison Water: On Sept 13, a 2003 agreement between the state and federal governments concerning streamflows through the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Park was set aside by a federal judge. The issue goes back to 1933, when President Herbert Hoover reserved some federal land between . Gunnison and Montrose for the Black Canyon of the Gunnison National Monument. Under a legal ruling known as the Winters Doctrine, when the federal government reserves land for a given purpose, it is also presumed to be seeking a state water right at tqat time to serve that purpose. In the case of the Black Canyon, the idea was to preserve its natural state, with high stream flows every so often to scour dead foliage, tree limbs, sand bars, and help maintain the Canyon in a natural state. The Black Canyon's reserved water right has never been fonnally quantified in a state water court, but in the 2003 agreement, the federal Department of the Interior agreed to a year-round minimum flow of 300 cubic feet per second, with occasional scouring flows as the climate and Aspinall Unit storage needs permitted. Several environmental groups sued in federal court to block the agreement, and on Sept. 13, U.S. District Judge Clarence Brimmer said the Interior Department in the 2003 agreement relinquished significant federal water rights, making it an unlawful disposition of federal property. The ruling may mean reduced power generation, as well as lower reservoir levels at the Curecanti National Recreation Area and Blue Mesa Reservoir, a popular recreation site, and less available storage for future water development. The ruling will certainly delay, ifnot put on hold, an EIS process to adjust operations of the Aspinall Unit for the benefit of Colorado River endangered fish residing in the lower Gunnison River. Water Developer Wants Union Park Case Reopened: At the end of September, a Palmer Lake water developer petitioned the Colorado Supreme Court for a rehearing on his plan to bring water from the Gunnison River basin to the Front Range, stating that his Union Park Plan is not dead. . 28