Laserfiche WebLink
? <br />I. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES. <br />A. Whether the water judge used the correct legal standard in confirming the amount of <br />water claimed for the Gunnison RICD. <br />B. Whether the evidence supports the Water Judge's Findings and Decree confirming <br />the amounts claimed by Upper Gunnison <br />H. STATEMENT OF THE CASE. <br />A. Nature of the Case, Course of Proceedings and Disposition in the Trial Court. <br />This is the appeal of the first recreational in-channel diversion (RICD) water right decreed <br />after enactment of Senate Bill 0 1-216 ("SB 216") in 2001. Applicant, Upper Gunnison River Water <br />Conservancy District, filed its RICD application in the water court, Water Division No. 4, on March <br />31, 2002, and, as required by SB 216, provided a copy to the Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />("CWCB"). SB 216 requires the CWCB to review RICD applications, to make certain findings <br />thereon, and a recommendation to the water court to grant, grant with conditions, or deny the <br />application. As part of this process, a hearing was held before the CWCB on September 10, 2002. <br />On October 1, 2002, the CWCB filed its Findings and Recommendations with the water court. <br />The case was tried in Water Division No. 4 on September 15 - 19, 2003. On December 26, <br />2003, the water court issued its Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order ("Decision"), and <br />a decree confirming the RICD water right clairned by Upper Gunnison River Water Conservancy <br />District. Appellants CWCB, State Engineer and Division Engineer filed this appeal. <br />B. Statement of the Facts. <br />Tourism, recreation and Western State College represent important parts of the Gunnison <br />County economy. (Vol. N, 37:11-22). In 1996, the outdoor recreation program at Western State <br />1