Judge Rules in Favor of Whitewater Park

Home Browse Search

? /-n?\ CRESTED BUTTE NEWS Crested Butta, GO (Gunnison Courdy) Thu, 5,000 Colorado Press Clipping Service 1336 Glenacm Place • Denver, CO 80204 303-571-5117 • FAX 303-571-1803 Whitewater park decision could help fight future water grabs continued from page 1 The Gunnison Whitewater Park, which opened in May 2003, occupies nearly one-quarter mile of the Gunnison River channel just west of the City of Gunnison. The park's course includes six structures that enhance white- water by creating waves, eddies, and holes in the river. In March 2002, when the whitewater park was still in its conceptual stage, the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District (UGRW- CD) began working to lock in formal water rights for the park. UGRWCD president Bob Drexel says the water dis- tricYs intention was always simply to protect recreation on the river, which con- tributes to the economy of the Gunnison valley. However, over the course of the water court tr'ial, the CWCB argued that the whitewater park should not be granted water rights because those rights might block future attempts to divert Gunnison Basin water to the Front Range. "We didn't go into the trial thinking that it was going to be a way of stopping trans- mountain diversion, but the state pushed us that way," Drexel says. During the trial, which began in September 2003 and lasted five days, the water dis- trict asked the court to guar- antee that 1,100 to 1,500 cubic feet per second (cfs) flow through the whitewater park during the summer months before any junior water right be considered. One cfs is roughly the equivalent of 646,300 gallons of water flow per day. The water district requested as little as 270 cfs during the water park's off- season in September. The request reflects the natural flow cycle of the river and cxeates the most varied recreational opportunities for boaters, explains water dis- trict board member Steve Glazer. "We were making a mod- est, conservative appeal to put that water to beneficial use," he says. However, the CWCB argued that the whitewater park should be granted only 250 cfs. According to Glazer, this number represents the absolute minimum flow nec- essary for recreation. "The CWCB's suggestion that 250 cfs is sufficient for a reasonable experience for whitewater rafting was disin- genuous," he says. In granting the whitewa- ter park its requested flows, Patrick acknowledged that the water right "... clearly will reduce junior upstreaxn developmetint, exchanges and transmountain diversion (of which none are presently identi"fied).° If upheld, the park's water right would be limited to the hours between 6 a.m. and 10 p.m., when boaters will most likely use the river. As of press time, repre- sentatives of the CWCB said they had not yet received offi- cial notice of Patrick`s deci- sion and were therefore unwilling to comment on the case. However, UGWCD's Drexel says he is confident that CWCB will appeal the decision and bring the matter before the Colorado Supreme Court. That court's decision could set a precedent for future water battles in the state.