My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Prehearing Statement of Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District and Exhibits A-F
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Prehearing Statement of Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District and Exhibits A-F
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2010 1:47:31 PM
Creation date
6/9/2010 9:02:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Gunnison RICD
State
CO
Basin
Gunnison
Water Division
4
Date
7/19/2002
Author
Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District, Cynthia F. Covell
Title
Prehearing Statement of Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District and Exhibits A-F
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
65
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
2002), finding that maximum utilization is promoted by "maximizing the use of <br />Colorado's limited water supply for as many decreed uses as possible consistent with the <br />state's interstate delivery obligations...." <br />The District's water rights will not preclude utilization of water for upstream <br />development or exchanges either. There are no known probable future substantial <br />upstream junior appropriations for direct flow or storage, and no known probable future <br />substantial changes, exchanges or transfers through the reach. However, water will be <br />available for future upstream development and exchanges through the reach in most years <br />because the flow rates appropriated are significantly less than the average flows in the <br />river through the reach. (Exhibit A; testimony of James Slattery, John DeVore, Kathleen <br />Curry.) While future projects may acquire junior water rights or exchanges that will <br />occasionally be called out by the District's water rights, this is to be expected. Indeed, <br />the whole purpose of adjudicating a water right is to give the right a place in the priority <br />system. <br />The District does not believe any existing federal policies, regulations or laws <br />affect or will be affected by the whitewater park. (Testimony of Kathleen Curry.) <br />Required federal permits for the project have been obtained. (Testimony of John <br />DeVore.) <br />As discussed above, the whitewater park will divert, capture and control the water <br />in the reach in a reasonable manner, consistent with S.B. 216, that will provide a <br />reasonable recreation experience without waste. (See Exhibit C; testimony of Gary <br />Lacy.) The park's water rights are not expected to place calls frequently, as the amounts <br />appropriated are below the average river flows. (See Exhibit A.) <br />The whitewater park is an amenity desired by the community. It is expected to be <br />well -used by both tourists and locals alike, and to generate revenues for the community. <br />(Testimony of John DeVore, Mark Gibson and Gary Lacy.) The economic effect of the <br />Gunnison Whitewater Park is not currently known, as it is under construction. However <br />other communities with urban whitewater parks have experienced positive economic <br />effects. (Testimony of John DeVore; see Exhibit F.) <br />The application has appropriate limitations in that the amount of water sought for <br />the Gunnison Whitewater Park leaves much water to be used for other purposes. The <br />limitation of the rights requested to five months of the year is also appropriate. The <br />District does not believe limiting the water right to particular times of day, or times when <br />users are actually present in the whitewater course is practical from an administrative or <br />operational standpoint. (Testimony of James Slattery; Kathleen Curry.) <br />Exhibit A, Figure 4 demonstrates that the amounts sought for the Gunnison <br />Whitewater Course are below the average flows in the reach. For example, during the <br />May 1 through May 15 period, for which a flow rate of 570 cfs is sought, the flow <br />entering the whitewater course is less than 570 cfs three years out of every 26 years. <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.