|
<br />Septen:ber 26, 2003 · <;rested Butte News' · page 9
<br />
<br />. group, says' that it was apparent
<br />that the state's coricer"n with the
<br />RICO appli~ation was due to its
<br />lohg...ter~ plan for additional
<br />'transm~Uhbiiri diversion. "My
<br />opinion is th'iit this is reatly the
<br />first ~e .the,pr~~ense wa~ gone;.
<br />the state's c~se restedj to-a large
<br />would in fact facilitate diver... and others, .The, ~WCB'S r~com... . extentl on proyiding. fgr' diver.. .-
<br />sions projects. mended flow of 250 cfs through- sions;/f . says Reed, adding" ~.i
<br />The idea of obtaining an out the five-month period serves 'thirtk the~ has been. a' definite
<br />RICD right began to gain steam in to keep more water unspoken for aitem P,t to' hide'" "any 'sta te
<br />2001, when it became evident that th~n if the UGRWCD's larger ihvolvement in future trans-
<br />Las"t week's trial in water a "wrutewater park' for kayakers .request was mets tl:tus,. theoreti-. mountain diverSions. But.! think
<br />coti:ft regarding the Upper and. rafters woul,d become a reali.. . cally, assuring the availability of .it.is going on/'
<br />Gunnison . River" Water ty~ An'R1CD right is designed to that much more water which For now,. Reed will cOntinue,
<br />C6ns~rvancy District's (UGRW- ensure' that a' certain supply of could be diverted for Front Ranf$e to stay up-la-date on the" issue"
<br />CD) applica~on for a recreational water will be guaranteed to pro.. purposes~ . " - . " , ;. .
<br />· ch 1 d () · h th th . ch " 11 Including- attendmJ; the meetin~s
<br />In':' anne iversion RICO ng t teet e purposes of e park.. After Su a sutplus lS ca ed a mar... f th St t. ~ d W -. t S I
<br />f th hit t k 1 aId" t 1 1 'th th. k t bI · ld It. th'. f th 0' e a eWl e a er up~ y
<br />or e w ewa er par was arge.. spe ng a engt 1 WI e recre- e a e Yle. J5 e 51Z~ 0 e." I 'H ti ", (SWSJ) 1-'
<br />Iy consumed by dis'cussion about ation community and considering. marketable yield that could make .. .m a._y~, hichh~b- , p_anntni
<br />the state's concern th,at such a right how such a right would impact or break, diversion' plans. ~ P;ocess, w . ,e, eli~es caul,!,
<br />would impair its ability tci divert 'the rest ofthe UGRWCDis respon- UGRWCD's expert witness, for- a sor::' ~~~t ,.co~~ s~ trans-
<br />. t t f th b · Whit th 'bi}' , f at fiIin I d. D hn t f N 1 moun In IverSl0n components4
<br />wa er OU 0, e asm. . e e' 51 tlties, a arm g was ma e mer epar en 0 ,. atura '-'1'11 be d · thiri I P
<br />, state has been quiet about any in March 2002. ,The RICO right, as Resources director Jim Lockhead, SWSI d o~~ ;v~~ I!, can so ,
<br />intentions of transmolll1tain diver- filed, would guarantee, flows ftom testified that the UGRWCD"s I t . .. d' oes~ ~~ u ' e trm;~unf
<br />sian, the trial indicated a blatan~ May 1 through September 30 application would not imp~ir ~n 1Verslm:'~ ,~~SJ a , h g fd
<br />interest in doing so, at least at ranging from 270 cubic feet per diversion attempts. However, the b e ,:~um 'thin' we sou,
<br />some point in the future. second (ds) to .1,500, ds, These ewCB expert testified otherwise. e cl o~g't~eIY: g we can to ·
<br />Due to a broad disparity in requested flows, says UGRWCD But while public statements indi- ,pre,~.~" G'" 'Walch' .,. .
<br />how much water the UGRWCD manager Kathleen Cut'r)7, refleCt cate diversion is not an is:>ue right ' ti ' ro: t er rJ . 0' ~execuf
<br />believes sho~lld be reserved for the best balance ~etween the now, the trial was diff~rent~ . NV~" l~ OR! 0 ,e ep.. enRt Od '
<br />ti] d h ch th d f ti 1. tall' ki"ll liTh" h" a"uta -. esources... nor 0
<br />recre~ ona .use an ow mu e nee s 0 ~crea ona IS &- S ~ "e > emp asts W~S._ ~o~- Kuharich,' director of the cWca
<br />state s Colorado . Water levels--and the needs of ranchers. pletelv on transmountam dIver... 'all bI C ' .. ., t' -. I
<br />C ' B" d . IT C III were av a e LOr commen H '
<br />, onservation oar Slon" says urry, r twas .
<br />(CWCB) ~elieve5 is appnr 1 1 astounding. We had anticipat..
<br />priate, Division, 4 Water eel think there 1uis been ed a discussion about the'
<br />.. Court Judge Steven Patrick merits of our application but
<br />postponed a. decisio~ until a definite 'attempt to hi~ they specifically, discussed
<br />the early months of 2004. - diversion projects.11
<br />"It doesn't matter any sta'te involvement in future In fict, Curry says that in
<br />
<br />whetherit's Union Park or ~ transmoun:tain diversions. But, the. state's opehi~g rema.rks,
<br />pump-back system, so ]on~ ' the state claimed that the
<br />as while I'm fvemor the I think it's going on." UGRWCD's application was
<br />headwaters of e Gunnison nothing more than a sub-
<br />\ .ver wilt sta' in the -Ramon. Reed tenuRe to cover up their onf!Cf
<br />Gunnison Rivelju, 8ai " , . in~ effort to block transmoun...
<br />Owens at Western State C;:onege',s Preceding last week~s mal, a. tam diversion~ But citing 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 CWCBJ a board facts' to suppor~ /either flow
<br />Refere~du~ AI which would under the auspices of the state"s regil;1le, Judge Patrick delayed
<br />enable bonding for water projects Department of Natural Resources. making a decision. .
<br />throughout the state. He added At this hearing, the CWCB made a ' Ramon Reed} president of
<br />that," as he envisions, the money fonnal findin~ that the RICO :right Peoplp QrpoF;lng Water Export
<br />being put to us'e, the numerous should never exceed 250 cis d~g Raids (POWER}, a local citizens!
<br />existing reservoirs in Colorado ~e entire period from May 1
<br />could be expanded slight1~ result- ' throuJ?;h September 30~ It is this
<br />ing in "signific:ant additions to the findirig that the UGRWCD and
<br />overall water supply." Such fur... CWCB went to trial over last week ~
<br />ther d~velopment of water storage and it is this finding" that Judge
<br />would theoretically provide water Patrick 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 expe~ed
<br />, lilt woul~ allow the Front until at least January 2004.
<br />Range to use m~re .Front Howeverl it was the state's
<br />Rang.ejEastern Slope water so concern with how the RICO right
<br />th"at they 'dOn1t have to cOIl'\pete would impact the statels ability to
<br />for Western Slope water/' added div_~rt water out of the Gunnison
<br />Owens! refuting suggestions it River basin that perturbs Curry
<br />
<br />. State' que~tions wllitewater
<br />park's impact on diversions
<br />
<br />The ,truth comes ,out
<br />
<br />by Pete Sharp
<br />
|