Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Pagel of! <br /> <br /> <br />nr,l4 r;;<J 1 <br />\~.J._v.~J <br /> <br />The Denver Post <br /> <br />Plans withdrawn for diversion from Gunnison <br />River <br /> <br /> <br />By Theo Stein <br />Denver Post Staff Writer <br /> <br />Tuesday, January 04, 2005 - <br /> <br />Proponents of a hydroelectric-power project that could have drained the Gunnison River to minimum <br />flows during fall and winter have agreed to relinquish their water rights, eliminating a substantia'l <br />threat to the Biack Canyon of the Gunnison Nationai Park, <br /> <br /> <br />An attorney for the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users' Association said the group would no ionger <br />pursue two court cases to defend its never-used right to divert about 1,000 cubic feet of water per <br />second from the Gunnison River through a tunnel to the Uncompahgre River basin, <br /> <br />An environmental group that fought the proposed AB Lateral hydropower project said it successfully <br />showed in water-court filings that there wasn't enough water in the river to supply the hydropower <br />plant, which faced significant, if not fatal, regulatory hurdles. <br /> <br />"It's clear to me the water users looked at arguments we made ... and determined the project was <br />not worth pursuing any longer," said Drew Peternell, an attorney for Trout Unlimited's Colorado <br />Water Project. <br /> <br />The power plant would have diverted all but the minimum required flow of 300 cubic feet per second <br />from the Gunnison River during cruciai fall and winter months, a time when the river generally runs <br />low, Peternell said, That would have "devastated" the trout fishery in the river and the Black Canyon <br />of the Gunnison National Park, he said. <br /> <br />It also would have caused flooding, erosion and damage in the Uncompahgre basin, according to <br />consultants hired by Trout Unlimited, <br /> <br />Attorney David Hallford, who represents the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users' Association, said the <br />decision not to proceed doesn't mean the project can't be resurrected at a future date, <br /> <br />Two years ago, the Uncompahgre Valley Water Users' Association asked the state water court in <br />Montrose to allow its conditional, or unused, water rights for the project, which dated to 1984, to <br />remain in effect, <br /> <br />Trout Unlimited opposed the applications, and a trial was scheduled for June, <br /> <br />Last month, the water users asked the court to dismiss the two cases. <br /> <br />Staff writer Thea Stein can be reached at 303-820-1657 or tstei[].@Qenv..erpost.CQill. <br /> <br />http://www.denverpost.comlcdalarticle/print/O. 167 4,36%257E53%257E2632969 ,OO.html <br /> <br />