My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12603
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12603
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:18:32 PM
Creation date
10/18/2007 1:25:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8155.915.D
Description
Chaffee County RICD- Related News Articles
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
4/8/2005
Author
Varied
Title
News Articles
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
News Article/Press Release
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Four Comers Free Press <br /> <br />Page 3 of 4 <br /> <br />his staff successfully claimed the repositioned boulders in the kayak course were the diversion <br />and the economic benefit was rafting and river sports. <br /> <br />The Colorado Water Conservation Board sued, but the state supreme court ruled Golden's claim <br />was legitimate. Fearing rafters would somehow trump development, the Colorado legislature <br />quickly passed SB 216, which puts applicants for recreational inchannel diversion rights under <br />the purview of the state water conservation board for review and on to the state water court for <br />approval. Currently dozens of towns are under that process, said JeffMoag, of Paddler <br />magazine, a national publication based in Steamboat. <br /> <br />"Colorado is way ahead of the curve on this compared to other states," he said. "More than half <br />of all whitewater parks nationwide are in our state." <br /> <br />Steamboat's claim for recreation water on the Yampa kayak course is being debated in the <br />courts, Moag said. What is an adequate flow for sufficient whitewater runs is the question. A <br />bill, SB 62, which sought to cap RICDs to 350 cfs, was defeated in the last legislative session <br />because the level was seen as too arbitrary considering the variety of river sizes in the state. It <br />could come up again next session. But the state water court's concerns that flows demanded by <br />river enthusiasts are too high could be alleviated somewhat with engineering, observers say. <br /> <br />For instance, whitewater courses could be arranged in such a way to allow for lower flows, such <br />as creating more pools or narrowing certain channels to divert water towards wave structures. <br /> <br />Moag remarked that it's inaccurate for opponents to categorize RIDCs as water sports versus <br />agriculture. "It's actually kayakers and traditional users of agriculture versus runaway <br />development in the state," he said. <br /> <br />"Guaranteeing use of rivers for both ag and rafting is the battle of the future." That sprawling <br />growth translates to 1 million new homes predicted in the next 10 years between Colorado <br />Springs and Pueblo. For the towns of Buena Vista, Salida, and Canon City, that could spelI <br />trouble for the worldfamous whitewater on the mighty Arkansas River. <br /> <br />With trips ranging from Class I and II rapids to the monstrous Class IV - V waterfalls in the <br />infamous Royal Gorge, the scenic Arkansas is considered the nation's most popular rafting <br />destination. It may seem nonsensical that growth downstream affects flows upriver, until one <br />realizes that the Onterrio Tunnel is situated near the headwaters of the Arkansas above three <br />communities that rely on rafting for their summer economies. <br /> <br />The pumping plant delivers water to the Front Range via tunnels that bore through the Roc:kies. <br />Saving some permanently for the rafting industry downstream is the goal of these communities, <br />say Chaffee County Commissioner Jerry Mallett. The county, in partnership with the three <br />towns, is negotiating guaranteed flows through SB 216, a process that has gone well, Mallett <br />said. <br /> <br />"The (state water board) has indicated it will not oppose the claim if we can resolve concerns by <br />interveners Aurora, Colorado Springs and Pueblo," he said. "I think we're about there because <br />we're balancing our rafting needs with those of developers on the Eastern Slope." <br /> <br />Obviously, with the heavysnowpack in the mountains, the Arkansas River will always have a <br /> <br />http://www.fourcornersfreepress.com/news/2005/080502.htm <br /> <br />10/4/2005 ".~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.