My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Golden, Breckenridge, Eagle Ridge RICD Excerpts, S-16
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
2001-3000
>
Golden, Breckenridge, Eagle Ridge RICD Excerpts, S-16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 4:42:03 PM
Creation date
8/10/2009 2:09:28 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.21A
Description
CWCB Hearing
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
6
Author
Susan M. Antonelli, Richard J. Matt
Title
Golden, Breckenridge, Eagle Ridge RICD Excerpts, S-16
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.
/
86
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
104 <br />l Q (by Mr. Porzak) Dr. Danialson, based_ on you.r experience as? 2 the former State.Engineer, is recreation.recognized as the beneficia ry <br />3 use of water in Colorado3 <br />Li <br />? <br />4 A Yes. <br />5 Q. And are you familiar with decrees, which list.recreation as <br />6 . a benefici al use? <br />7. A Yes, I am. <br />8 Q Both direct flow and storage decrees. <br />9. A Y e s. -- , <br />10 Q Are you familiar with the concept of duty of water? .- , <br />1l A Yes. <br />12 Q Based on your experience, what is the application of the <br />13 concept of duty of water? <br />14 A My understanding is. the concept of ,duty of water was an <br />15 early appr oach to the question of beneficial use.and.waste. The, <br />16 concept,.a t least.my first encounter, was in looking at very old <br />17 irrigation decrees.where the science of irrigation and irrigation <br />18 efficiency was not well-developed and the Courts were seeking to.put <br />19 some kind of factor into the efficient diversion of water for <br />20 irrigation . This usually took the formof one c.f:.s. per 90 acres., <br />21 one c.f.s. per 50 acres, but there was a limit placed that tri,ed to, <br />22 in my opin ion, require that a diverter not take more water than <br />23 reasonably necessary to.irrigate the lands he was seeking to:irrigate. <br />24. Q Was the concept of duty of.water evEr app2ied to limit,the <br />25 amount of beneficial use? <br />26 A Not to limit the beneficial use, no.
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.