My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Notice of Appeal
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Notice of Appeal
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:31 PM
Creation date
7/28/2009 11:07:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.2F
Description
Colorado Supreme Court Filing
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
4
Date
2/9/2004
Author
Ken Salazar, Susan J. Schneider
Title
Notice of Appeal
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.
/
41
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
use or waste. The Court concludes that that is stili the standard which this Court must <br />apply. Based on the discussion above, the Court is persuaded and finds that the <br />amount sought in this instance does not reach the level of specufation or waste. The <br />Court again notes that there is no finding by the CWCB that would suggest that there is. <br />Colorado has recognized RiCD since Citv of Thornton v. Citv of Fort Coflins, 830 <br />P.2d 915 (Colo. 1992), and legislatively has restricted this water right in Senate Bill 216. <br />4. The tinal area for legal concfusions are what were referred to as the <br />102(b) factors. The Court concludes that the CWCB has not found nor does the Court, <br />that at any of the leveis requested by the Applicant this RICD will impair Colorado's <br />ability to fully develop and put ta beneficial use its compact entitlements, injure any <br />CWCB instream flow right, is inconsistent with maximum utilization or will not divert, <br />capture or control the requested water. <br />ln considering the 102(b) factors, the Court concludes, baseci on the evidence <br />presented, <br />(a) The amounts requested will not impair Colorado's ability to fully <br />develop and put to beneficial use its compact entitlements. The <br />[egislative history expresses concern of such a right at or near the <br />state line precluding development up river. Here, the right sought is <br />on the Upper Gunnison, roughly 150 miles from the state line, 10 <br />miles downstream from the point where the East and Taylor Rivers <br />meet to form the Gunnison River. Further, portions of these upper <br />20
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.