My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree for Cases 2872, 5016, 5017, 88CW382
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree for Cases 2872, 5016, 5017, 88CW382
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:21 PM
Creation date
7/24/2009 12:47:42 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.51A7
Description
Exhibits
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
11/10/1992
Author
Edward W. Nottingham
Title
Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, Judgement and Decree for Cases 2872, 5016, 5017, 88CW382
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Court Documents
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
The Williams Fork Reservoir right, with'a priority date of <br />November 10, 1935, was decreed by the District Court of Grand'. <br />County, Colorado, in its Case No. 657. Nevertheless, Denver has <br />agreed that such exchanges should be administered by the Division <br />Engineer as of a priority date of June 24, 1946. The provisions <br />proposed in the Stipulation and in the proposed decree to govern <br />the administration of exchanges to storage in Dillon Reservoir <br />and for diversions through the Harold D. Roberts Tunnel using <br />waters previously stored by Denver in its Williams Fork Reservoir <br />in the exercise of the water right decreed to that facility by <br />the District Court of Grand County in its Case No. 657 (title to <br />which was quieted in Denver by this Court in its Final Decree in <br />these Consolidated Cases of October 12, 1955) are consistent with <br />the judgments and decrees heretofore entered in these <br />Consolidated Cases. <br />3. Na quantitative allocation of the right to the use of <br />water from Green Mountain Reservoir among the beneficiaries is <br />practicable. Instead, the most practical way to allocate the <br />benefits to West Slope beneficiaries of Senate Document No. SO <br />from the releases of waters stored in the 100,000 acre-foot pool <br />in Green Mountain Reservoir is to provide for administration by <br />the Colorado State Engineer on a day-to-day basis to assure the <br />most equitable distribution of those waters in carrying out the <br />intenL of, senate Document No. 80 and in conformity with <br />applicable federal and Colorado law. <br />4
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.