Laserfiche WebLink
<br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />administration ofthe Division 7 State Engineer. Testimony of Dr. Eisel and Mr. <br />Whitehead. <br /> <br />1 <br />~ <br /> <br />59. The diversion and storage rights for the ALP, as decreed in Case No. <br />80CW237, have a priority date of September 2,1938, and an adjudication date of March <br />21, 1966. Applicant's Ex. 20 at 13 of 13, ~ 8. Dr. Eisel also found that administration of <br />the ALP under the prior appropriations system by the Division 7 Engineer will further <br />protect downstream senior Animas River water rights from possible injury by future <br />implementation of ALP while it is operated pursuant to the 2000FSEIS. Id. <br /> <br />i$l <br /> <br />60. The Change Applications in 02CW85 and 02CW86 relate only to the <br />decreed water rights ofthe Ute Mountain Ute Tribe with respect to the Animas and La <br />Plata Rivers, which are described in Paragraph'6.A. of the Stipulation for Consent Decree <br />(11/12/91). Change Applications. The proposed changes include a change in plan of <br />operation from delivery ofUMU Tribe water for irrigation and M&I to a plan for water to <br />be "initially stored in the reduced Ridges Basin Reservoir authorized for construction <br />under the 2000 Settlement Act Amendments." Id. Under the Application a "maximwn <br />of 6,000 acre-feet per annum of municipal and industrial water and a maximum of26,300 <br />acre-feet per annum of agricultural irrigation water"would be changed. to an "average <br />annual depletion of 16,525 af(which can be increased if the State of Colorado elects not <br />to take its share of water, as described in the 2000 Settlement Act Amendments)." <br />Change Applications. The change is to municipal and industrial use only. Id. <br /> <br />61. "A change of water right shall be granted" by this Court "if the change <br />does not increase the conswnptive use of the Tribal water right or injure other water <br />rights." Applicant's Ex. 2 & 3 (1991 Consent Decrees) at Stipulation for a Consent <br />Decree, ~12.D. Thus, a change of water rights may be granted so long as both conditions <br />are met: no increase ill consumpti ve use and no injury to other water rights. Under <br />Colorado law, a "change of water right. .. shall be approved if such change, contract, or <br />plan.. .will not injuriously affect the owner of or persons entitled to use water under a <br />vested water right or a decreed conditional water right." C.R.S. ~ 37-92-305(3). <br /> <br />62. The Ute Mountain Ute Tribe may not change a periodic flow for irrigation <br />to a continuous flow for M&I ifthe result is an enlargement of water rights. Farmers <br />Reservoir and lIT. Co. v. City of Golden, 44 P.3d 241,246 -247 (Colo.,2002) (citations <br />omitted); Orr v. Arapahoe Water and Sanitation Disl., 753 P.2d 1217, 1224 (Co16.l988). <br />One result of the change to M&I may be that the Tribe will attempt to use a continuous <br />diversion of water rather than the seasonal diversion as set forth in the monthly <br />percentage distributions established by the 1991 Consent Decree. City of Westminster v. <br />Church, 167 Colo. 1, 13,445 P .2d 52, 58 (Colo.1968). The Court recognizes that under <br />some circumstances such a change may enlarge the consumption of water from the <br />stream to the detriment of other appropriators. Id. at 59. <br /> <br />63. For the purposes of considering the question of consumptive use, Moving <br />Parties submit that the pennanent quantification of water rights set forth in the 1991 <br />Consent Decrees shall be converted to historic consumptive use pursuant to factors set <br /> <br />20 <br />