Laserfiche WebLink
. <br />Upper Gunnison River Water Conser•vancy District <br />02CW038 <br />District's recreational water right affects b oundwater development in particular. (The small impacts <br />on junior upstream diversions, whether wells or surface diversions, are discussed above.) <br />In addition to being incorporated into the notion of beneficial use, as discussed above, and <br />into the notion of conjunctive use of surface and groundwater supplies, the concept of maximum <br />utilization has been discussed in a number of court cases, begi11111T1g with Fellhauer v. People, 447 <br />P.2d 986, 993-4 (Colo. 1968). The concept of maximum utilization as developed by the courts <br />contains the concepts of efficient diversion practices, lack of speculation, and reuse ofwater. Under <br />this broader concept, too, the Gunnison Whitewater Park clearly promotes maximum utilization. <br />The anti-speculation doctrine prevents appropriation and decree of water rights for purely <br />speculative purposes, as such speculation prevents development and use of water rights for which <br />there is an immediate, lcnown need. Colorado River Water Conser-vation Dist. v. Vidler Tunnel <br />Water Co., 594 P.2d 566, 568-9 (Colo. 1979) ("Vidler"). In a related "maximum utilization" <br />concept, unused absolute and conditional water rights are not to be considered in determining water <br />availability for new conditional water rights because to do so would discourage the development of <br />the present conditional water right in order to allow potential use of these previously unused water <br />rights. The Supreme Court found such consideration ofunused water rights to be speculative. Board <br />of County Comm'rs of Counry ofArapahoe v. U.S., 891 P.2d 952, 962 (Colo. 1995). <br />-25-