TWIN LAKES — For decades, a beloved pond on the outskirts of town served as a quiet thinking and fishing spot for locals and an oft-photographed stop for road-tripping tourists hoping to capture Colorado’s rugged beauty.

Photos of the pond, with its surface reflecting a historic barn and snowcapped peaks, adorn postcards, puzzles and tourism articles promoting Twin Lakes — as well as the website of the luxury developer now accused of draining the same picturesque pond and surrounding wetlands.

In May, locals noticed the pond’s water levels declining. Now, nothing but a mud pit remains.

The drying of the pond and the channel that feeds it has caused a rift in tiny Twin Lakes, home to a handful of inns, a general store, a saloon and about 300 people. The historic town 20 miles south of Leadville, along with its two larger namesake reservoirs, are a haven for campers, hikers and anglers. The town also serves as a stopping point for people traveling to Aspen over Independence Pass.

“We had no notice, no warning, no input,” Jennifer Schubert-Akin, a 17-year homeowner in Twin Lakes, said of the developer’s drying of the pond. “It’s kind of like giving us the middle finger.”

The dry pond prompted some residents to ask the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to investigate the developer, AngelView at Twin Lakes, and to lobby county officials to deny final approval of the development’s plans.

The developer, Alan Elias, said he and his company did nothing wrong when they blocked the water from flowing to the pond, known locally as the “Barn Pond.”

The channel that fed the pond is an illegal ditch with no associated water rights, he said, and he has no authority or obligation to send water to the pond.

“It’s extremely complicated and I wish we could find peace in this community, but the water has, quite frankly, divided us,” Elias said. “Hopefully over time it’ll sort itself out.”

Water for decades has run down the slopes of Mount Elbert through the West Fork of Bartlett Gulch, which branches into two channels north of Twin Lakes. One channel flows southeast, through a corner of the AngelView property and to the reservoir. The other flows south, through the outskirts of town — to the Barn Pond and a series of other ponds — and then to the reservoir.

AngelView’s water engineer maintains that the channel that flows to the Barn Pond is a human-made ditch that has been diverting water illegally from Bartlett Gulch. Therefore, the water must run only through the channel that goes to their property, said Steve Bushong, the developer’s water attorney, who echoed Elias in saying AngelView has no legal obligation to channel water to the pond.

This spring, AngelView deepened the streambed where the two channels split, sending all the water to the channel that flows southeast and drying the channel to the pond.

Elias and Bushong said they deepened the streambed to allow for higher runoff levels, to prevent flooding and to ensure they meet their legal obligation to measure water flow farther downstream.

Ultimately, the water that flows down the gulch belongs to downstream users, including AngelView, Lake County and hundreds of others with rights in the Arkansas River basin, Bushong said.

“Every drop of water is pretty much allocated, either to downstream senior water rights or the interstate compact,” he said. “So while you understand why someone might think they’d just like to have a beaver pond and have a ditch and take a little water out … that’s literally taking someone else’s water.”

It’s up to the Colorado Division of Water Resources to decide where to send the water, Bushong said.

The office’s top water engineer for the Arkansas River basin, Rachel Zancanella, said in an email that the division had not yet decided whether the channel that leads to the pond is natural or an illegal ditch. She planned to visit the area this week to investigate.

Those in Twin Lakes advocating for the return of the pond, however, point to maps that show streams flowing in the Barn Pond area in 1935. They argue it was a natural stream, not a human-made ditch.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which helps enforce the Clean Water Act, is now investigating AngelView’s deepening of the waterway, as well as work done to wetlands on the main development property, spokesman Michael Graff said. Elias is cooperating with the investigation, Graff said.

Beyond the complex legal arguments, some residents said the town has lost a valuable resource.

Don Westfall could see the pond from his front porch and loved to watch visitors take in the view or enjoy benches built by locals by the pond shore. Trout thrived in the pond and spawned in the channel near his property, he said.

Now, people either walk straight past the mud pit or walk over and turn back, he said.

Schubert-Akin said she did not oppose the development before the water issue arose. She thought the developer’s plans fit well with the community.

Kelly Sweeney, another resident, agreed.

“We’re not anti-development — just obey the law,” she said.

The development is in its last stages of preparation and Elias expects to receive final approval from Lake County leaders in the coming weeks. With that approval, he’ll be able to start selling the 18 available lots, which start at $1 million.

Elias said he is proud of the work he’s done to maintain the natural beauty of the 75-acre development by leaving large swaths of it undeveloped, including a 9-acre wildlife corridor. He has spent time and money restoring and maintaining acres of wetlands on his property. Eventually, he plans to build information signage and a trail around the wetlands on his property, though they will not be open to the public.

The anger toward AngelView is not fair, he said, since the company is simply following the law.

“It’s tough to have something beautiful and then lose it,” Elias said. “I really, truly feel for my neighbors, that they don’t have something.”

Get more Colorado news by signing up for our Mile High Roundup email newsletter.

Originally Published: July 8, 2024 at 6:00 a.m.