Laserfiche WebLink
Upper Gicnnison Rzve? Water Conservrtncy Dishict <br />23 Subject to the tezms and conditions hei-ein, applicant is entitled to a decr•ee confirmir.:g <br />conditional water rights for recreational in-channel boating uses at the proposad in-channol ?- <br />physical contxol stiuctures and devices in the amounts hex-ein decreed duiing the claime:d <br />time peiiods with an appropriation date of'October 20, 1998. <br />24. In ordet to comply with the Supreme Court's d'uectives in CWCB v. Zlpper Gunnison, this <br />Court was iequii ed to (A) remand this case to the C WCB for r evised findings consistent with <br />the Supteme Court's delineation of the CWCB's role; and (B) detetmine wheflier tb.e <br />applicant's r equested water rights meet the definition of an RICD . CYYGB y. Upper Gunnison <br />109 P. 3d at 603. <br />A By oxder dated Time 16, 2005, this Court remanded the case to CWCB.. CWCB's <br />stipulation filed herein provides that: "Pursuant to C.R S§ 37-92-102(6)(a), the <br />CWCB recommends that the watex couit grant the application for recreational in- <br />channel diver-sion water rights, subject to the teims and conditions of' [this deciee]" <br />Ptusuant to that same stipulation, CWCB has made the revised findings required by <br />C..R,S § 37-92-102(6)(b) and reported them to this Court as requir,ed by C R.S §37- <br />92-.305{13} and the Supreme Court's remand order The Col.ut has duly considered <br />said revised findings and recommendation.. <br />B As provided in pazagraph 14 above, Court concludes as a matter of law that eac:i <br />flow r•ate heiein deci eed for the Gunnison Rivei Whitewater Course, duxing the time <br />peziod for- which it is decreed, meets the stahitoty definition of "iecreational in- <br />channel diversion" set foith in S B 216 and atticulated by the Colorado Supreme <br />Court. C,R.S § 37-92-103(10 .3); CWCB v. Upper Gunnison 109 P..3d at 603.. <br />Therefore, each amount herein decreed is "the minimum stream flow as it is captured., <br />controlled and placed to benefieial use between specifie points defined by physica.l <br />contiol sttuctures piusuant an application filed by a county, municipaIity, city anci <br />county, water district, water and sanitation district, water conservation district, ar <br />water conseivaney distiict for a reasonable recreation expeiience in and on the <br />watez." C.R..S.. § 37-92-103(10 3). The applicant's intended recieation expeiiences <br />aie reasonable in light o# the amount of water in the Gunnison Rivex zn the ieach <br />during each time period for which an RICD flow rate is decreed. CWCB v. Uppe,y <br />Gunnison, 109 P.3d at 602-603. <br />12/21/OS -9-