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

Home Browse Search

District; Gary Lacy; whom you met this morning, the designer of this particular whitewater course; Dr. Mazk Cnbson, who's a professor here at Western Sta.te College m the Outdoor Recreation Department and will talk ,about why tliis particular amenity is of value and benefit to the college community, wluch is a key economic component of the Grunnison community's economic base; our Presiden# of the Upper Gtuinison River Water Conservancy District, Greg Peterson, a long-time raucher whd wM explaan how the board decideci to participate in this ptocess with the Coiuity and how they chose the flows that they appropriated; water rights engineer and consultaut to•ttie District, Tim Slattery from Helton and- Williamsen, who wBl talk about some of the information I lnow many people are interes#ed in -- #he flow ra.tes m the river and how the water is actually beirig used now and what changes will occur as a result of the in stream, hirchannel diversion; and finally, Ka.thl.ew C,ury, the General Rrana.ger af the Upper C"iunnison Dastrict; will be available to pick up on what the others lia.ve said and hopefully fill in the spaces. ' No-vu, we were alittle brt disappoint4 I have td say, with your staff s recommendgtion. They recommended flows of only 250 cfr in May, August and September and $ows of 540 cfs in June and Juty. It's not clear why tbis is the oase. The.y apparen#ly seem to ttunk that-the appropriation is not so much based on what the appropriator intends as evidenced in an AppliCatian made after balalncin.g the various Senate BiIl 216 factors, but ra.ther the amount. ttat can b6 appropriated as some certain minimuin amount of water .based on the flows at which whitewater-features are first created in a whitewater eourse.. .. ... ...... . . . . In reachiag these conclusions, it appears that your staffhas relied on t)e District's expert witness, Gary La.cy. Wt don't have any informatioa that they've done independent investigation of their owa. And they ieally don't 4tppeaz to have cansidered at all the ktent of tho District an,d the CoWity in appropriatiag the fiows they have claimed. They have aLso claimed that these flows WM interfrre with Compact development but we have not seeen yet any evid.ence of any actual project tha#'s in pracess or in the platining stages that this water ri,ght is going to interfere with. So the DisWet disagreas with the staffposition and urges an mterpretation of Senate Bill 216, after you hear the evidence, that's _ rwre hatmonious with Colorado Iaw in considering the intent of the appropriator, which as a key factor in determining what an . appropriation should be: what, is the appropriator's intent We clon't think Sena#e Bill 216 changed any of that. Colorado Water Conservation Board Septemtier 10,2002 Hearing Transcript , ' Page 9