PUB00158 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

if an allocation between appropriation States is to be just and equitable, strict adherence to the priority rule may not be possible. For example, the economy of a region may have been established on the basis of junior appropriations. So far as possible those established uses should be protected though strict application of the priority rule might jeopardize them. Apportionment calls for the exercise of an informed judgment on a consideration of many factors. Priority of appropriation is the guiding principle. But physical and climatic conditions, the consumptive use of water in the several sections of the river, the character and rate of return flows, the extent of established uses, the availability of storage water, the practical effect of wasteful uses on downstream areas, the damage to upstream areas as compared to the benefits to downstream areas, if a limitation is imposed on the former -- these are all relevant factors. They are merely an illustrative, not an exhaustive catalogue. "Wasteful uses" were later given careful attention in the V ermejo River dispute, where the Court made it clear that the availability of "reasonable conservation measures" to reduce both Colorado's proposed upstream diversion and New Mexico's existing downstream uses was an important consideration. Colorado v. New Mexico, 459 U.S. 176, 186 (1982). The Court remanded the case to its Special Master for more specific findings on the conservation issues and later concluded that Colorado had not established by the requisite "clear and convincing evidence" that its proposed diversion should be permitted. Colorado v. New Mexico, 467 U.S. 310 (1984). The Court emphasized that the Special Master also erred in considering the extent of the contribution to the interstate river made by the portion of the Vermejo watershed in Colorado (jd. at 324): 16