|
<br />September 26, 2003 · ~rested Butte News' · page 9
<br />
<br />. group, says' that it was apparent
<br />that the state's concern with the
<br />RICD appli<;ation was due to its
<br />lo:ng-ter~ plan for a~ditionaJ
<br />lransrnputltairi diversion. "My
<br />opinion is that this is, realty the
<br />first ~e _the.pn:~ens~ wa~ gone;,
<br />the state' s c~se rested; to' it large
<br />would in fact facilitate diver.. and others. -The. G:WCBJg reCOffi- 'extent, on pro_viding. for. diver- .
<br />sions projects. mended flow of 250 cfs throu~~'" sions;" . says Reed, addirtgr I'I
<br />The idea of ob taining an out the five..month period serves 'thiJ;lk there has been. a 'definite
<br />RICD right began to gain steam in to keeJ-l more water unspoken for a"tteritpt - to. hide - "any .state
<br />20011 when it became evident that th~n if the UGRWCO-'s larger involvement in future trans..
<br />Last week's trial in water a .wmtewater park' for kayakers .request was met, thus/. theoreti-: mountain divef.sjof1s~ But.! think
<br />court regarding the Upper and, rafters would become a reali-' caJ1}1 assuring the avaiJ~biHtr of . i e s going o~ I;
<br />Gunnison . River - Water ty~ An.RICO right is designed to that much more water which For noV\1, Reed will cbntinu~ '
<br />C6ns~rvancy District's (UGRW- ensure' that a. certain supply of could be diverted for Front Range to stay up...to--date on the - issue..
<br />CD) applica.tion for a recreational water will be guaranteed to pro- purposes. . I including attendin~ the m tin s
<br />in~channeI diversion (RICO) right teet the purposes of the park.. After Such a surplus 15 called a mar- f th St t. · d W '- t ee ~
<br />for the whiteW<lter park was large" speaking at length with the recre" ketable yield. It is the siz~ of the. . ~ 'f ~ a e7~~ I a er 1 Sup?-l'(
<br />1 d b' di · b t. ~ d 'd' k tabl · Id th t "ld 'ak ,_nl_la~ve ---5 ) 12 annlng
<br />y C?l1Sume . y SCUSS1~n a ou atiqn commuruty an cons! enng . mar e e Yle . a cou me. :. hieb h .b Jj Id
<br />the state's concern fhilt such a right how such a right would impact or break. diversion' plans'. ~ p:ocess, .w in' e e e;es cau r'
<br />would impair its ability to divert . the rest ofthe UGRWCDfs respon- UGRVvCD's expert witness, for- a so7'~ Pd~ ..t,.,cotnp se irans-.
<br />water out of the basin. W~e the . sibilities, aformal filing was made' mer Department of" Natura'l ~,~~ a:;. ]VerSlO~m~nen~.
<br />. state has been- Quiet about any in March 2002. .The RICO rigllt, as Resdurces director fin:'- Lockheaq, SWSI d ~~ ~v~~ g c~ 89
<br />intentions of transmountain diver- filed, would guarantee flows from testified that the UGRWCD' s I t . . d' . oes~ ~~ u e tra:w:!;
<br />sion, the trial indicated a blat~! May 1 through September 30 application would not impair ;:n lversl0~ty, ,7;;~SI a . h g ~
<br />interest in doinp; so, at least at ranging from 270 cubic feet per diversion attempts, However, the b e .;~U1U , thin . we sou,
<br />some point in the future: . . second (ds). to ,1,500 . cfs. These ewcs ~xQert t.estified othe~. :cl~:git~;~. ~ we ~an t~ ·
<br />Due to a broad dispanty In requested flows, says UGRWCD But whlle public statements mdl- P .N "th G - . Walch . .' .
<br />how much water the UGRWCD manager Kathleen Curry, reflect cate diversion is not an issue right ti' ~ tr f~' D' ~exe;:uf
<br />believes should be reserved for the best balance between the now, the trial was different~ . NV~ 1 c ~ 0 .e ep.. enR od .
<br />recreational,useandhowmuchthe needs of recreationa1ists-all skill . "The, emphasis w.as .~om- K~~ch,..~~:;e~f th:odv~
<br />state's Colorado Water levels-and the needs of ranchers. pletely on h"ansmountam diver... -.ail hI f' , .. - t - -. I
<br />~ . . were av a e or commen. '
<br />, Conservation Board ~/r says Cur1"Y~. nIt was ' ~
<br />(CWeB) ~elieves is appro- mrllilll I J1I J I II j astounding. We had anficipat...
<br />priate, Division, 4 Water "1 think there has been ed a discussion about the'
<br />.. Court I udge Steven Pahick merits of our application but
<br />postponed a decisio~ until a definite .cittempt to hi"~ they specificapy, discussed
<br />the early months of 2004. . . ~' diversion projects~11 '
<br />,"It doesn't matter any state tnvolvement In future ~ fa'ct.. Curry says that i!J
<br />whether it's Union Park or a . 4 d t · B the state's opening rem~rks,
<br />pump..back svstem/ so long. tr~nsmount~ln ZVerSlO11S. U~. the. state claimed that the
<br />as while I'm ~vemor. the . I think it's going on." . UGR.WCD's application was
<br />headwaters of e Gunmson nothIng more than a sub:-
<br />River win stay in the _ -Ramon Reed tettuRe to cover up their on~\f
<br />~ Gunnison River," stia. . in~ effort to block tranSJnoun-,
<br />Owens at Western State <;oIlege/~ Preceding last week's mal, a. tam diversio~ But citirig his opin...
<br />Water Workshop on July 23, 2003. hearing took place in September ion that there were not enough
<br />He then. introduced 2002 with the CWCB, a board facts. to suppor~ ~,either flow
<br />Refere~duIt?- A, which would under the auspices of the state's regime, Judge Patrick delayed
<br />enable bonding for water projects Department of Natural Resources. m~g a decision. .
<br />throughout the state. He added At this heariniL the CWCB made a ' Ramon Reed, president of
<br />that,' as he envisions the money formal finding that the RICO ,ri~t ppople Opposing Water Expo:rt
<br />being put. to us'e" the numerous should never exceed 250 cfs du~g Raids (POWER~I a local citizens'
<br />existing reservoirs in Colorado the entire period from May 1
<br />could be expanded slight1~ result- . through September 30~ It is this
<br />ing in II significant additions to the flndirig that the UGRWCD and
<br />overall water supply." Such fur'" CWCB went to trial over last week ~
<br />ther development of water storage and it is this finding that Judge
<br />would theoretically provide water Patric;:k will attempt to sort_out. But
<br />for growth while preserving due to time constraints in the five-
<br />enough for irrigators as well. day trial" a decision is not expe9ted
<br />''It woul9 allow the Front until at least January 20041
<br />Range io use more .Front However, it was the state's
<br />Range/Eastern Slope water so concern with how the RICO right
<br />that they .don't have to compete would impact the state's ability to
<br />for Western Slope water," added di~~rt water out of the Gunnison
<br />Owens, refuting suggestions it River basin that perturbs Curry
<br />
<br />. State que~tions wbitewater
<br />park's impact on diversions
<br />
<br />The ,truth conies ,out
<br />
<br />by Pete Sharp
<br />
|