Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />W <br />l\J <br />--:r <br />..'c~ <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />pollution in the stream, impairing beneficial uses. Stated <br />differently, there is no right to in-stream appropriations <br />for pollutant dilution purposes. All waters in and tributary <br />to surface waters are available for appropriation, subject to <br />the quantitative rights of seniors. This is the essence of <br />the Colorado appropriations doctrine. Metropolitan Suburban <br />Water Users Association v. Colorado River Water Conservation <br />District, 148 Colo. 173, 187-188, 365 P.2d 273 (1961). <br />The common law of water quali ty !:,rotection in <br />Colorado forwards the maximum utilization of the water <br />resource for beneficial uses. It cannot be read to restrict <br />or condition the right to appropriate volumes of water from <br />the stream, but only to provide relief against the generation <br />and introduction of waste products which diminish the in- <br />centive and usefulness of appropriations by others. <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />WATER QUANTITY PROTECTION FOR <br />BENEFICIAL USE - THE STATUTORY <br />PARTING OF THE WATERS <br /> <br />A. The Colorado Water Quality Control Act <br />Is Subject to the Water Rights Laws of <br />the State. <br /> <br />, <br />/I."j <br />~'f ~ <br /> <br />In COlorado, water quality law compliments rather <br />~ <br />than detracts from water quantity law. The common law de- <br />veloped by the Courts of Colorado provides the background <br />for ,understanding and interpreting Col~rado statutory <br />enactments on water quality. The common law has not been <br />supplanted 1 the Legislature provided for cumulative remedies. <br />C.R.S. 1973, 25-8-612. The long history of a constitutionally <br />based water rights system, and concomitant water quality pro- <br />tection, was the background against which the Colorado <br /> <br />-3- <br />