CWCB Concerning the Application for Water Rights of Upper Gunnsion River Water Conservancy District Transcript

Home Browse Search

had read as the highest flow recorded at that gauge for the month was wha.t they appropriated.. Now, Senate BM 216, which azose out of the concerns that sort of a water right could preclude all firture upstream develapmen#, is a recognition by the legislature that recreational in channel diversions are an appropriate sort of water right. And Senate BM 216 explicitly confirmed the authority of entities h-ce the Upper Gunnisan District to appropriate these water rightS• Senate BM 216 was also a reflection of the legislature's desire to give the CWCB, this board, the authority to consider whether a parkicular appropriation for recreational in chamel diversian would impair development of conswmptive use from Compact eatitlements and whether it would promotE maximum utilization. These aze the major cansiderations; there are athcr oues as well having to do with the appropriateness of the stream zates and the access and so forth. The District, whle not waiving its right to praceed under the - authority ofifie Fo line af cases, wanted me to tell you that itgre, --:ly-vakes itsrelatioxisbip wrth?-C??-and wI3JAs to work through tbis process, pursuant to 5enate BM 216, and is looldng fprwazd to showing you Oat t31ey have in fact considered all of the faCtors needed to be considered in appropriating a water right whle j st.il ensu.ting maximum utilizati.on and that consumptive use development of Coznpact entitlemeuts is possl'ble. Our evidenpe wM shbw that this case is not lke the Golden case. I . reAlize the numbers are quite a bit lazger than thase tba# were appropriated in the Pueblo case. Bu# this isn't the Pueblo case -either. .. The District has. nat appropriated peak $ows on the river; rsther our . wihnesses wffl testify tba.t the DistFiGt considered the needs of the community, the design parameters of the cotm, the average historic flows, the need to eccammoda.te otbet futtue uses of water upstream of the course, end has done so. ' The flows claimed by the Distriet . leave enough wa#er on the table tv atlow for further placement to consumptive beaeficial use of water to which our state is entitled under the Colorado River Compact. The: witnesses wiT1 also testify that this application promotes maximum beneficial use. It allows the non consumptive wbitewater course ises while stM admitting for other uses as wel1. This balancing approach is consistent with Senate Bill 216. So the witnesses you'll heaz.&or}today are Cyunnisan Couirty Manger, Jolm DeVore, who w11 teli you of the cooperative encieavor that this pioject is between the Connty and the Upper Crtxnnison Colorado Water Conservation Board September 10, 2002 Hearing Transcript Page 8