Laserfiche WebLink
<br />6 .. Gunhi,~on Country Tinies Thursday, Septef!lber 25, 2003, ~ <br /> <br />State pl~ys-water diversion card-oat R <br /> <br />Alan Wartes, v~rsion and i~ alla:wed by rela- <br />tively new Colorado legislation. <br />It is hard t.~ imagine sus-. 'The law te.quires the Colorado <br />pense and intr~gue in a hearing Water Conservation Board to ~e- <br />over -water rights for recre- ' view such applications and make <br />ational boating on- the Gunni-~ recommendations to the water <br />son River. Yet, f,or four and a co'urt pri9r to adjudication of the <br />half days last week, arguments, -right._ La~t spring,. the CWCB <br />in the trial demo~strated where' met in Gunnison and vote.d to <br />Water is most likely to be fou~d recommend a flow of only 270 <br />in the West: at the cente,r of ers. Later" the board voted to for- <br />controversy. many oppose the application~ <br />At issuee this time is the recent . Arguments presented by attor- <br />Upper Gunnison River Water neys fQ,r the CWCB in nearly a <br />Conservancy'District application week of testimony centered on . <br />fot the Tight 10 keep 1,SOn cubic, one issue: the 'potential for the <br />feet per second flowing at the, RICD tight to d~mage the s'tale's <br />Gunnison Whitewater Park d~r- ability to build a trans-mountain <br />ing the, peak of the runoff se~- diversion project in the Upper <br />son~ The ,application req~estet;l, Gunnison basi:Q. <br />smaller ~mourits i~ early sum": "We tho,ught there"would be a <br />mere and fall.'The rigllt is 'called lot more energy spent on the ap-' <br />a Recreational IQ-Channei Di- plication itself, and whethe~ the <br /> <br />flows we asked for were appro- <br />priate)" said Uq~WCD manager <br />Kathleen Curry. ~~But it' was all <br />about the (RICD's) impact on <br />upstream development of watQ" , <br />for -out of basin uses. n <br />Gove.rnor Owens has stated <br />publicly that he will not approve <br />any trans-mountain. diversion <br />project in the Gunnison Basiii~" <br />The director of, the Colo~ado' <br />Department" ,-'of.,' Natural <br />Resources, ~reg Walcher~. who <br />oversees the CWCB, has publicly <br />echoed the ~overnor's claim. ' <br />"'It certai~ly gives me pause," <br />said Cu"rry: "It is v'ery ,unclear <br />why the governor and Wfllc,her <br />are' making these public state- <br />.- ments and then the .CWCB pulls <br />out all the stops to oppose the <br />RICD on th~ .grounds that it pre-, <br />vents diversion." <br /> <br />In, an interview ~on Tuesday) <br />Walcher said he was unaware of <br />the stfates!y the' sta h~.'s hiwyers : <br />elected to pursue in the case. -- <br />uDifferent people in s.tate gov~ <br />erriment have different views,>> " <br />he said. ~That-is not a position i <br />was aware of, and not. one. I' <br />would have approved of if -I h'ad <br />been made aware of it. ~. _ <br />In partitularJ ,the state.'s ~ttOT- <br />neys pointed to' the Taylor Park <br />Ptoject identified in the 1989 " <br />Phase O~e study done on water <br />demand and s~pply issues m: ~he, ' <br />Gunn,iso,": Basin. That proposal <br />would involve a complicated ex:':. <br />change. or purchase of Taylor > <br />Reservoir water from currerit " <br />owners4 The water-would the'n. " <br />become available for diversioh to <br />the Front Range. - ~ ' <br />EtThey put all their. cards' on <br />