The case for protection
A living valley. A line we will not cross.
Homestake is more than stored water.
Save Homestake opposes Whitney Reservoir and new or expanded interbasin diversions from Homestake Valley.
Every documented Whitney configuration would destroy the core fen complex, but the threatened landscape is larger than one parcel. Stop the project before public-land, water, recreation, and cultural losses are reduced to promises of mitigation.
Why we oppose Whitney and the evidence supporting denial.
Published sources checked 17 September 2026 · Field record updated 12 September 2026
Follow the project
The footprint is larger than the lake.
The utilities describe collection, storage and uphill pumping within a larger White River National Forest landscape. A pumped reservoir is not just a waterline: its power, roads, construction, and operations would spread habitat loss, noise, groundwater disturbance, and recreation impacts across the valley.
Whitney's proposed water system
- CollectNearby creeks
- StoreWhitney concept
- MovePumping
- ConnectExisting Homestake
How Whitney would change land beyond the shoreline
- Power
- Lines, clearing, equipment, operating noise, and a permanent industrial presence
- Access
- Road relocation, traffic, closures, habitat fragmentation, and lost public recreation
- Groundwater
- Trenches and altered drainage can damage fen-supporting water beyond the shoreline
The local legal route
The commissioners can deny a noncompliant project.
The Eagle County Board of County Commissioners is the 1041 permit authority. The applicant must prove compliance with every applicable standard. Conditions are an option only when they actually bring the project into compliance; an uncured failure requires denial.
Current Chapter VI controls today. The September 15 proposal would control only after adoption and its effective date.
| Current Chapter VI | If the September draft takes effect |
|---|---|
Strongest denial grounds
|
Clearer process, changed standards
|
1994
A court reinstated Eagle County's denial of the specific Homestake II proposal on wetland and nuisance evidence. The cities' water rights did not guarantee approval of that design.
Fens and function
Every studied reservoir option destroys the core fen.
Our field mapping places mature fen wetlands and the creek across more than 80% of Aurora's valley-floor property. The photographed fen complex lies inside all four documented reservoir options.
The living fen system
- Plant community
- Peat structure + processes
- Groundwater + chemistry
Fen loss matters because this is not simply wet ground. It is a groundwater-fed peat ecosystem built over thousands of years. Permanent flooding would eliminate the original peat body, hydrology, habitat, and place. Colorado research found peat physical properties still unrestored after 20 years; transplantation cannot preserve or promptly recreate the system destroyed here.
Water that can be delivered
Capacity is not dependable supply.
A reservoir can hold a stated volume and still face limits on filling, refilling and drought-year deliveries.
How Homestake Creek connects to Shoshone
- Homestake Creek
- Eagle River
- Colorado River
- Shoshone
- 1902
- Shoshone
- 1929
- Shoshone
- 1952
- Homestake priority
Older water rights govern when Whitney may divert water from the creek and refill. The cities must disclose its reliable dry-year supply under those rules.
Whitney must disclose:
- Legal refill opportunities
- Drought-year deliveries
- Exposed acreage and duration
Wildlife as evidence
Make the valley visible in the record.
Our four current wildlife-camera stations are on the valley floor. Each is in habitat that at least one documented Whitney option would flood; the option varies by site. Repeated records across seasons show functioning habitat and movement routes, not vacant acreage. Flooding would remove habitat while roads, lighting, traffic, and noise fragment the surrounding network. Exact locations remain protected.
Wildlife recorded in the source archive
- Elk
- Deer
- Fox
- Moose
- Mountain lion
- Lynx
Landscape, history and rivers
Protect the whole cultural landscape.
-
Holy Cross Wilderness and public lands
A boundary change would permanently remove congressionally protected acreage to serve a new interbasin diversion. Roads, infrastructure, and noise would erode the solitude and primitive recreation the designation protects.
-
Ute and 10th Mountain history
Flooding, blasting, and road relocation could erase physical evidence and sever the landscape relationships that carry Ute and 10th Mountain history forward.
-
A living river's share
Keep enough water in Homestake Creek to sustain downstream wetlands, aquatic habitat, and the living river through dry years.
The decision we seek
Deny Whitney. Protect Homestake.
Front Range growth does not create a claim on Western Slope water. The durable path is conservation, reuse, system efficiency, and enforceable demand limits, not another interbasin diversion.
-
Prove the need.
Separate existing demand, growth, reserves and storage constraints.
-
Compare options that meet the need with less harm.
Use equivalent reliability, cost and environmental assumptions.
-
Disclose the complete project.
Show infrastructure, operating rules, groundwater effects and lawful water availability.
-
Measure what would be lost.
Count the permanent loss of ancient peat, connected habitat, a living creek, public access, quiet, and cultural landscape.
-
Make enforceable findings.
Deny approval when the record cannot support the required findings.
Read the complete edition for the legal analysis and all 54 source entries. We owe our children and future generations an intact Homestake Valley.