Laserfiche WebLink
Thus, the CWCB rules and determinations on "maximum utilization" are entitled <br />? . <br />to deference., ° <br />, <br />c. 250 c.f.s. is the minimum stream flow necessary for a reasonable <br />recreation experience that promotes maximum utilization. <br />The CWCB's finding that 250 c.f.s. promotes maximum utilization of Colorado's <br />waters supports the purposes of SB 216 and is supported by the case law and the <br />Applicant's own evidence. First, SB 216 supports a finding that the RICD promotes <br />maximum utilization at 250 c.f.s. because the intent of SB 216 was to ensure maximum <br />utilization by allowing only minimal and reasonable appropriations of water to ensure <br />that the state could develop and use its water in the future. § 37-92-103(10.3). Co- <br />Sponsor Spradley stated that: "It makes sense that attention be given to the impact of <br />these recreational uses have on our state's future abilities to develop and use water <br />resources." ( Exhibit C, p. 3). Additionally, the Senate heard testimony that because the <br />diversion requirement created inherent physical and monetary limitations on the amount <br />of water that could be claimed and there were no such limitations here for instream uses, <br />the CWCB would be the appropriate body to ensure maximum utilization. (April 18, <br />2001 Senate Hearing, p.37, attached hereto as Exhibit G). <br />Second, the case law supports a finding that the RICD promotes maximum <br />utilization at 250 c.f.s. because that amount of water prevents the Applicant from <br />commanding the whole or a substantial flow of the stream merely to facilitate its taking <br />the fraction of the whole flow to which it is entitled under section 37-92-103(10.3) ("the <br />minimum stream flow"). "[E]ach diverter must establish some reasonable means of <br />14 The Applicant is not disputing the propriety of the rulemaking or the appropriateness of the factors <br />considered that determine "maximum utilization" in those rules, but rather it ignores the CWCB's <br />inteipretations of "maximum utilization" contained therein. <br />14