WSPC12924 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

e I, ! e " ;,:l ,'~ Moving Parties to expand the quantHy of reserved water rights established in 1991. See Stipulation for Amendment of Consent Decree. 48. The irrigation delivery systems to the La Plata Basin have been deleted from the Project facilities, and the current proposal, ill advance of identification of actual M&I uses for the water, is to store the water in Ridges Basin Reservoir in the Animas Basin. Applications for Change of Water Rights; Stipulations for Amendments to Consent Decree. The proposed amendments, if approved, will result in a change of the source 0 f the water rights to the Animas River, rather than the Animas and La Plata Rivers, with respect to hath Tribes' water. Stipulation for Amendment to Consent Decree. Approval ofthe Stipulations to Amend and the Change Applications will also result in a change in type of use with respect to the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe's water. Change Applications; Stipulations to Amend. 49. In Colorado, the right to change a point of diversion or place or type of use is limited in quantity and time by historical use. See Weibert v. Rothe Bros.. Inc., 200 Colo. 310, 317,618 P.2d 1367,1371-1372 (Colo.1980). Agricultural water may be changed to M&I uses, "provided that no adverse [effect] be suffered by other users from the same stream, particularly those holding junior priorities." Green v. Chaffee Ditch Co., 150 Colo. 91, 106,371 P.2d 775, 783 (Colo.1962), quoting Farmers Highline Canal and Reservoir Company et at. v. City of Golden et aI.. 129 Colo. 575, 272 P.2d 629 (Colo. 195 4). The principle is well established that ')unior appropriators have vested rights in the continuation of stream conditions as they existed at the time oftheir respective appropriations, and that subsequent to such appropriations they may successfully resist all proposed changes in points of diversion and use of water from that source which in any way materially injures or adversely affects their rights." Id. 50. Stream conditions cannot be preserved in proceedings for a change of use and change in place of use without calculating the amount of water diverted from a stream and the resulting amounts of water both consumed and returned to the stream system from the use with due regard to quantity, location, and time. See Weibert, suora; Orr v. Arapahoe Water and Sanitation Dist., 753 P.2d 1217 (Colo. 1988). Bruce Whitehead testified that in order to calculate "consumptive use," one requires the following variables: the actual amount of water diverted, a report of the particular use of the water, and the return flows (as estimated through engineering analysis, or less often, as measured). 51. Mr. Whitehead stated that the Durango Division Office of the State Engineer has not done any engineering or injury analysis with respect to the proposed Amendments and Change Applications. 52. The Munieipal and Industrial applications of the Ute Tribes' water rights under RA4 are not currently known, and projected M&I uses by the Ute Tribes are non- binding. Applicant's Ex. 10 (2000FSEIS) at 2.1.1.3.1. Therefore, it is "difficult to accurately project the actual diversions and corresponding return flows" under RA4. Id. . at 2.1.1.3.1. accord, testimony of Dr. Leonard Eisel at trial ( diversions cannot be , 18