Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />McInnis' bill, the "Black Canyon ofthe Guunison National Park and Gunnison Gorge National <br />Conservation Area Boundary Revision Act of 2002" would add 2,725 acres to the national park, <br />bringing the park's total acreage to 33,025. The conservation area will be increased by 5,700 acres to a <br />total of 63,425 acres. Wildlife habitat would expand by 7,296 acres, which would benefit several species <br />that are listed as threatened, endangered, and BLM-sensitive, such as the Bald Eagle, the River Otter, <br />Delta Lomation, and the Clay-Loving Buck:)Vheat. The proposal to extend the boundaries of the park <br />was a cuhnination of efforts through the Park Service and willing sellers in and around the Black <br />Canyon of the Gunnison. McInnis' legislation is a companion measure to Senator Campbell's (R-CO) <br />bill S.1944. <br /> <br />Pathfinder Project - Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre and Gunnison National Forests: The Pathfinder <br />Project, a local community-based group, convened to assist the Forest Service in providing instream <br />flow protection on the Grand Mesa, Uncompahgre, and Guunison National Forests (GMUG), held a <br />series of public meetings in Montrose, Grand Junction, Gunnison and Norwood to inform the public <br />about their efforts and gather input. The goal of the Pathfinder Project is to provide recommendations to <br />the Forest Service describing instream flow management strategies. The Forest Service intends to utilize <br />these recommendations as it revises the forest plan. <br /> <br />Meeting attendees discussed their desire fer instream flows to maintain high water quality for municipal <br />water supplies, to protect aquatic species (especially endangered species), geothermal hot springs, <br />riparian areas, and wildlife. Attendees also recognized the positive impacts to wildlife from agricultural <br />diversions and water development. <br /> <br />For further information on the public meetings and/or the Pathfinder Project or to take the Pathfinder <br />Survey go to htto://www.gmugpathfinder.org. <br /> <br />Platte River Basin Issues <br /> <br />Update Regarding Substitute Supply Plans and Ground Water Use: In response to a Colorado <br />Supreme Court Case decision in December 2001 (Empire Lodge Homeowners' Association v. Ann <br />Moyer and Russell Moyer) HB 02-1414 was enacted. The new law clarifies the State Engineers' <br />authority to issue temporary substitute supply plans. The State Engineer may approve the temporary <br />operation of limited plans if an application for approval of augmentation has been filed with the water <br />court and approve limited plans if depletions do not exceed 5 years. <br /> <br />The State Engineer has initiated a new rulemaking process to update the 1974 rules for the South Platte. <br />The proposed rules allow the State Engineer to annually approve ground water management plans, <br />including exchanges. The rules were promulgated in May 2002 following a rigorous attempt to address <br />all parties concerns. The deadline for Statements of Opposition is July 31 and it is hoped that a trial will <br />occur prior to next spring. <br /> <br />There are over 4000 wells in the South Platte that will be affected by the rules and the trial. The Ground <br />Water Appropriators of the South Platte (GASP) manage a water portfolio for approximately 3000 of the <br />wells. The outcome of the rulemaking could have a dramatic effect on how ground water is managed <br />both technically and administratively. The two main issues are the technical assumptions regarding <br />efficiency/consumptive use and the desire of some objectors to have a date certain for all plans to go to <br />the water court. <br /> <br />GASP's, complex portfolio of water rights change dramatically each year and they say it is not practical <br />to adjudicate a new plan each year. Under the propose rules, these plans would go to the State Engineer <br />each year with the opportunity for public comment. This process would reduce technical, administrative <br />and legal costs, while affording protection to senior water rights and allowing sufficient administrative <br />rights for potential objectors. Ifthe process that comes out ofthe rules and trial are too onerous it will <br />21 <br />