Laserfiche WebLink
F <br />Upper Gunnison River Water Consea vancy District <br />02CW038 <br />There is no effect on development of upstream junior water rights for out-of-basin uses <br />because the Aspinall Unit water rights themselves are so large that they place a call on the Gunnison <br />River nearly all the time, as shown on Exhibit UG-13. A junior upstream water right developed for <br />out of basin uses would not benefit from the Subordination Agreement, and would only be able to <br />divert, even without the District's recreational water right, in times af very high river flows. <br />The only hypothetical out-of-basin exchange even identified at trial is described in a 1989 <br />proposal by the Colorado Water Resources and Power Development Authority that entails moving <br />senior water rights downstream from Taylor Park Reservoir to Blue Mesa Reservoir, thereby freeing <br />up storage capacity in Taylor Park Reservoir. This freed-up storage capacity could then be filled by <br />exchange from the marlcetable yield pool in Blue Mesa Reservoir, and the water stored in Taylor Park <br />Reservoir could be transported out of the Guiuiison River Basin. <br />No such project is being developed, promoted, or even contemplated. If it were, Mr. <br />Seaholm and Mr. Lochhead agreed that it would be subject to other major constraints, such as water <br />availability upstream of the whitewater park," land use and environmental impediments, and <br />contractual and legal obstacles, including possible Congressional approval. This Court should not <br />" The Colorado Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's finding that only approximately <br />20,000 acre-feet were available for transmountain diversion purposes at the structures proposed <br />for the Union Park project. See Board of County Comm'rs of County ofArapahoe v. Crystal <br />Creek Homeowners Assoc., 14 P.3d at 330, 345. <br />-22-