Laserfiche WebLink
Environmental Opposers apparently perceive as more favorable. Fourth, although Environmental <br />Opposers raise the specter of wasted effort in this case if the amendment is allowed and the Black <br />Canyon right is quantified either through negotiation or litigation, that effort will likely involve only <br />minimal amounts of this court's time and is a risk that the Colorado Water Users and Officials are <br />willing to take. <br />The delay that Environmental Opposers brush aside as just a "usual inconvenience," Motion <br />at 6, is highly prejudicial given the history of this case. Over twenty years ago in this same case, <br />the Colorado Supreme Court said: <br />This case began in 1967. Since 1971, the federal government has known of <br />its obligation to quantify reserved water rights. The tremendous <br />uncertainty that minimum flow rights will inject into the existing state <br />appropriation scheme makes any further delay unjustifiable. Holders of <br />decreed and conditional water rights cannot plan or develop sizeable water <br />projects until they are certain of the extent of the federal government's <br />claims. <br />U. S. v. Denver, 656 P.2d at 30 (emphasis added) (citations omitted). Accordingly, the Court ruled <br />that the United States had to quantify claims for Dinosaur National Monument in six months, rather <br />than five years. Id. Twenty more years of uncertainty have elapsed since the Court held that further <br />delay would be "unjustifiable ". The water users of the Gunnison basin are entitled to certainty now, <br />not further delay. In addition, the practical effect of granting the requested stay would be to vacate <br />the trial date established by this Court and agreed to by the parties at the October 3, 2002 status <br />conference. Since that conference, the Court has steadfastly maintained that scheduled trial date. <br />If the Court grants Environmental Opposers' requested stay, given the Court's busy docket and the <br />13 <br />