Laserfiche WebLink
)k <br />Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy Disti-ict <br />02CW038 <br />The modification results from the requirement that there be CWCB and water court <br />consideration of "compact impairment," i.e., "whether the adjudication and adininistration of the <br />claimed water rights would impair the ability of Colorado to fully develop and place to consumptive <br />beneficial use its compact entitlements." C.R.S. § 37-92-102(6)(b)(I). Compact impairment <br />considerations conceivably could be used to limit the amount of a recreational in-channel claim in a <br />way that goes beyond the limits existing within the traditional notions of "beneficial use" and <br />"rr,aximumutilization." Potential compact impairment from recreational in-channel water rights was <br />a key concem voiced during the SB 2161egislative hearings. See footnote 4, supra. By requiring <br />CWCB and water court consideration of compact impairment issues, SB 216 addresses amount- <br />related concerns such as "water grabs" and potential interference with future water rights <br />development, while simulaneously addressing issues related to possible shenanigans at the state line <br />and unwanted appropriations by the federal government. <br />Examination of the rest of SB 216 reveals that other than this "compact impairment" <br />language, there is no plain language indicating that the amount of a recreational in-channelwater right <br />claim should be limited or determined with respect to any criteria besides the limits that inherently <br />exist within the notion of "beneficial use" including the concepts of "appropriative intent" and <br />"reasonably efficient practices." Rather, other plain language in SB 216 demonstrates that <br />appropriative intent and traditional notions of beneficial use still apply and still function as <br />-13-