<br />.,
<br />
<br />'"
<br />
<br />Page 2 ot .
<br />
<br />arid lower base 3,250 water rights, In a drY year, it's.kely that any true "peak" flow
<br />would be left over for the Black Canyon.
<br />Wendy McDermott, executive director ofHCCA, contends that the environmental needs of
<br />the Black Canyon are simply not met by the agreement between the United States and State
<br />of Colorado, "We wanted the natural hydrograph restored," says McDermott,
<br />In June, the same five environmental groups filed a brief with the state water court,
<br />requesting that the state court reject the state-federal agreement. While that complaint has
<br />vet to be resolved, the new federal court complaint seeks to refine issues related to the state
<br />~ater court complaint. Consequently, the plaintiffs are hoping for a stay, or temporary halt,
<br />to the state water court complaint while the other one moves forward. The latest federal
<br />court complaint alleges that the federal government violated several provisions oflaw,
<br />including the National Park Service Act, the 1999 Black Canyon Act, the Administrative
<br />Procedure Act, and the National Environmental Policy Act.
<br />"Through federal legislation, Congress has made it clear that the highest standard of
<br />protection must be provided for national parks and monuments. Yet, the United States is
<br />abandoning almost all of its reserved water right, which would provide for the park's needs
<br />for present and future generations," says McDermott "The communities surrounding the
<br />Black Canyon rely heavily on tourist dollars. Every year, the park generates as much as $12
<br />million in revenue to a rural part of Colorado. If Black Canyon water rights truly become
<br />secondary to the Aspinall Unit's at Blue Mesa, we could very well see massive water
<br />exports out ofthe Gunnison Basin to the bluegrass lawns of the Front Range, leaving us
<br />with a virtually empty canyon."
<br />When the five groups filed the initial complaint in state water court, several other groups
<br />formally expressed their objection to the environmental groups' efforts. Those entities
<br />objecting to the environmental groups' objection included the local Upper Gunnison River
<br />Water Conservancy District (UGRWCD), the State of Colorado, the Colorado Farm
<br />Bureau, the Colorado River Water Conservancy District and the Colorado River Energy
<br />Distributors Association. In short, the aforementioned groups considered the agreement's
<br />terms amenable and did not think that the environmental groups had a right to ask for any
<br />changes to it.
<br />John McClow, legal counsel for the UGRWCD, explained that they filed the joint objection
<br />because they did not feel that the environmental groups had the authority to ask the courts
<br />for higher flows and that the courts themselves do not have jurisdiction to do so in any
<br />case. And with the new federal district court filing, that has not changed. "It is my opinion
<br />that the law is crystal clear," says McClow, adding, "The environmental groups say, 'We're
<br />the protectors ofthe environment and since the U.S, is abdicating that responsibility, we'll
<br />do everything we can.' That's an admirable sentiment but they don't have the authority [to
<br />ask the court to increase flows]."
<br />Still, the environmental group coalition will move forward with the complaint in an attempt
<br />to prove that the federal government has acted illegally. "The park was created specifically
<br />to protect the Black Canyon's spectacular gorges and additional features of scenic,
<br />scientific, and educational interest," said Bart Miller, an attorney for four of the groups and
<br />Water Program director for Western Resource Advocates (formerly the Land and Water
<br />Fund of the Rockies). "The government's own scientific analysis shows that preserving
<br />these features of the park requires preserving the natural flow patterns of the river. Yet the
<br />government has illegally given up these flows."
<br />Miller believes that the next month or so will be spent working on gaining the stay on the
<br />state water court complaint. Then work on the federal complaint will commence as long as
<br />federal entities are not, as he put it, successful in "scuttling" the latest complaint.
<br />
<br />"ocal News
<br />
<br />002Q09
<br />
<br />lttp://www.crestedbuttenews.com/news4.html
<br />
<br />9/12/200:
<br />
|