Laserfiche WebLink
<br />there was a need for reformulating previously proposed projects <br />such as the San Miguel. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. Rick Gold, newly appointed Project Manager for the <br />Bureau's Durango Office, briefly summarized the objectives of <br />such a study and stated that the proposal presented to the Board <br />at the September meeting was, in his mind, a discussion document <br />only and the study would proceed only with strong showing of <br />local support and need. <br /> <br />Mr. Danielson expressed concern and warned against a federal <br />agency conducting a management study of the state's water without <br />meaningful state participation. <br /> <br />Mr. Kroeger moved, seconded by Mr. Johnston, that the Board <br />consent to the study contingent upon favorable resolution of the <br />three issues raised by Mr. McDonald. Motion adopted unanimously <br />by voice vote. <br /> <br />Item 17 - Aspinall Unit <br /> <br />a. Exercise of Water Rights <br /> <br />Chairman Vandemoer called on Mr. McDonald to discuss this- <br />item. Mr. McDonald called attention to the State Engineer's <br />report in which Mr. Danielson explained the water rights <br />administration issues stemming from the recent groundwater well <br />permits filed by the City of Gunnison. (See Item 6 - State <br />Engineer's Report.) <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Mr. McDonald briefly traced the historical record of this <br />issue and pointed out that after authorization of the Aspinall <br />Unit and during preparation of the feasibility report for the <br />Unit, local interests in the Upper Gunnison River basin expressed <br />concern over the fact that construction of the Unit could <br />preclude upstream development of waters of the Gunnison River. <br /> <br />To alleviate this concern and in order that future <br />developments in the Upper Gunnison River Basin may be assured of <br />rights to the use of water, policy discussions between the Bureau <br />of Reclamation, local interests and the Board called for the <br />united States (Bureau of Reclamation) to subordinate diversion <br />and storage rights of the Aspinall Unit to future developments <br />upstream. The aggregate amount of upstream depletions for which <br />the priority of the Aspinall Unit may be waived was not <br />determined at that time although an upstream depletion of 60,000 <br />acre-feet was allowed in the operation studies for the Aspinall <br />Unit in the determination of the water supply available for power <br />generation. <br /> <br />Lengthy discussion by members ensued relevant to the Board's <br />role in the amicable resolution of this issue. Mr. Johnston <br />moved, seconded by Mr. Robbins, that Messrs. McDonald and <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />-14- <br />