My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Answer Brief of Appellee Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
Answer Brief of Appellee Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:41:39 PM
Creation date
7/29/2009 1:49:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.2F
Description
Colorado Supreme Court Appeal
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
4
Date
9/30/2004
Author
Cynthia F. Covell
Title
Answer Brief of Appellee Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy District
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.
/
45
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
? <br />? a <br />TABLE OF CONTENTS <br />TABLE OF AU'THORITJES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii <br />EXPLANATIOTI OF CITATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v <br />1. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 <br />H. STATENZENT OF THE CASE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 <br />A. Nature of the Case, Course of Proceedings and Disposition in the Trial Court . . 1 <br />B. St:atement of the Facts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 <br />M. SUNIlVIARY OF ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 <br />1V. AR.GUM:-NT ......................................................... .8 <br />A. TYie water court used the correct legal standard in confirming the <br />asnounts of water claimed for the RICD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 <br />1. With respect to determination of amount, tke word "minimum" <br />in the definition of RICD does not impose a more restrictive <br />standard than the concept of beneficial use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 <br />2. The SB 216 legislative hisorty supports the legal standard <br />applied by the water judge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 <br />3. The CWCB does not offer any way to apply its "minimum flow" <br />standard that is different from beneficial use . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 <br />B. Thi-, evidence supports the Water Judge's Findings and Decree confirming the <br />amounts cla.imed by Upper Gunnison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 <br />C. CVITCB's deterxnination of amount should not be considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 <br />• 1. SB 216 does not give CWCB the authority to make determinations <br />concerningamount ......................................... 19 <br />2. CWCB cannot expand its control over RICDs by demanding an <br />It <br />-1-
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.