Laserfiche WebLink
4. The Decretal language which directs that rights be <br />administered as though they had been adjudicated in the first'_ <br />available adjudication following their priority dates requires <br />that they be administered as of those dates without postponement <br />for any reason. <br />5. The Decree herein is consistent with present <br />administration by the Colorado State Engineer and will not <br />injurious'Ly affect the owners of, or persons entitled to use <br />water under a vested water right or a decreed conditional water <br />right. <br />Based upoM the foregoing findings, the following Conclusions <br />of Law are made: <br />1. In the entry of this Decree, this Court is exercising <br />the continuing jurisdiction it retained by the Final Decree and <br />Final Judgment entered on October 12, 1955 in these Consolidated <br />Cases for the purpose of effectuating the objectives thereof, <br />including the administration of the water rights for the <br />Colorado-Big Thompson Project and the administration of exchanges <br />of water from Denver's Williams Fork Reservoir to its Harold D. <br />Roberts Tunnel and Dillon Reservoir. That retained jurisdiction <br />is not derived from the operation of the Colorado Water Right <br />Determination and Administration Act of 1969, as amended. <br />z. witn respect to tnase matters governing the <br />administration of exchanges of water released from the 100,000 <br />acre-foot pool in Green Mountain Reservoir for West Slope <br />5