WSP09490 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

iiU27ll8 23 3. A vested water right was adjudicated prior to enactment for use in connection with an existing ditch within an area. The ditch's owner applies to the relevant Colorado water court for permission to change the point of diversion to a new structure to be built at a downstream location outside any area, and to discontinue use of the existing ditch. Nothing in the bill would prohibit this change, which would be regulated solely by Colorado law. 4. An existing ditch in an area has historically been used for irri- gation of lands located outside any area, in accordance with a vest- ed water right adjudicated prior to enactment of the bill in connec- tion with that ditch. The ditch's owner applies to the relevant Colo- rado water court for permission to change the type of use (e.g., from irrigation use to municipal water-supply use by a nearby town outside the area) with no change in the point of diversion within the area. This action would be permissible, provided that the change in the type of use did not result in any change in the timing or amount of diversions at the location of the ditch within the area. Under section 8(f), the relevant Secretary will have a continuing obligation to ensure compliance with the conditions the bill imposes on proposed changes in types of uses of affected water rights, either by participation in State water adjudication proceedings or through other effective st~ps; if the Secretary does participate in such State proceedings, the Secretary (like other participants) may invoke any applicable doctrines of Colorado water law, such as those requiring that future use of a changed water right must be limited to its ac- tual historic use. 5. An existing ditch in an area has not been used for such a pe- riod of time as to raise the issue of whether under Colorado law the associated water right has effectively been abandoned, when the ditch owner seeks to resume use of the ditch for exercise of a water right adjudicated prior to the bill's enactment. The relevant Secretary would be required to monitor the use of the ditch, and to take such action as necessary to ensure that it is not used in violation of applicable State doctrines, such as those related to abandonment and historic use. These actions could include refusal of access for use of a water right which the Secretary has reason to believe would be considered to have been abandoned under ap- plicable Colorado water law, or the initiation of proceedings for a judicial determination of abandonment. 6. An existing ditch in an area has historically been used for irri- gation of a limited amount of lands outside any area under a vest- ed water right adjudicated prior to enactment in the amount of 10 cubic feet per second ("cfs") for use in connection with that ditch. The ditch's owner begins to increase the amount and/or frequency of diversions, within the decreed limit of 10 efs, in order to irrigate additional lands. This action would be impermissible, because sec- tion 8 would authorize only continued exercise of vested water rights in accordance with Colorado law, and Colorado water law prohibits the enlarged use of an irrigation right on additional lands, not historically irrigated by exercise of that right, without water court approval. Under section 8(f), the relevant Secretary would be required to monitor the use of the ditch and to take ap- propriate steps to enforce the restrictions imposed by the bill, which could include refusal of access to the ditch for a_ use imper-