Laserfiche WebLink
Supreme Court, State of Colorado (Appeal from District Court, Water Division No. 4, Case No. 02CW38) <br />Case No. 04SA44: Colorado Water Conservation Board v. Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District <br />Answer Brief of the Colorado River Water Conservation District <br />1. STATEMENT OF ISSUES <br />A. Whether the water court actually held that the limitations imposed by Senate Bi1101-216 <br />("SB 216") infringe on the constitutional right to appropriate. <br />B. Whether the water court properly applied SB 216 by determining that a recreational in- <br />channel diversion ("RICD") water right should be measured first by the intent of the <br />appropriator, subject to possible reduction, and that a single minimum flow for the Gunnison <br />RICD was not appropriate. <br />C. Whether the legislature eliminated both the role of the water court and the intent of the <br />appropriator, and instead delegated to the CWCB the sole authority to determine the <br />minimum stream flow for a reasonable recreation experience. <br />D. Whether the CWCB's Findings ofFact that are based on a non-adjudicatory hearing without <br />any sworn testimony or opportunity for cross-examination are subject to rebuttal by a <br />preponderance of the evidence, and whether the CWCB's Recommendations are entitled to <br />any presumptive validity. <br />II. STATEMENT OF CASE <br />The Colorado River Water Conservation District ("River District") adopts the Statement of <br />Case set forth by the Applicant, the Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District ("Upper <br />Gunnison District") and states further as follows: <br />The River District is statutorily delegated the duty to promote the conservation, use and <br />development of the water resources of the Colorado River basin (including the Gunnison River) and <br />is provided broad powers to safeguard for Colorado, a11 waters to which the state is equitably entitled <br />under the Colorado River compact. C.R.S. § 37-46-101 (2003). The River District also is charged <br />with the duty of promoting the growth and development of the entire district and the welfare of all <br />of its inhabitants. Id. The River District approached this case with its unique dual statewide and <br />Page 1