My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 9:03:30 AM
Creation date
5/21/2010 12:58:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Gunnison River
State
CO
Basin
Gunnison
Water Division
4
Date
9/22/2003
Author
Ken Salazar, Carol D. Angel, Bratton & McClow LLC, Moses, Wittemyer, Harrison and Woodruff P.C., Burns, Figs & Will, P.C.
Title
Response of CO Water Users and Officials to Motion to Stay Proceedings
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.
/
22
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
number of parties here, it is unlikely that a new trial date could be secured before 2006. <br />Environmental Opposers argue that their federal complaint "only involves a limited number <br />of the parties to the state proceedings," so that for the other parties to this case there will be "little, <br />if any" effort required during a stay. Motion at 6. This ignores the reality of what Environmental <br />Opposers are attempting with their federal complaint. As explained above, Environmental Opposers <br />are asking the federal district for an order directing the United States to secure flows "in quantities <br />and with the frequencies necessary" to serve the purposes of the Black Canyon, relief which will <br />inevitably lead the federal court into quantifying the flows that are necessary. Further, <br />Environmental Opposers also ask that the United States' Proposed Amended Application be set <br />aside, presumably in favor of the original application. Nearly four hundred parties filed statements <br />of opposition to that original application, most alleging injury to their water rights. The pending <br />Motion to Amend has been fully briefed by the Applicant, the Environmental Opposers and the <br />Colorado Water Users and Officials. Thus, Environmental Opposers' federal complaint presents <br />the objectors in this case with a prejudicial Hobson's choice: either sit back and wait while <br />Environmental Opposers seek a quantification of the Black Canyon reserved right that is injurious <br />to their rights', or attempt to intervene in the federal case to protect their interests. Environmental <br />4 In Sierra Club v. Yeutter, 911 F.2d 1405 (10th Cir. 1990), a case with many parallels to <br />Environmental Opposers' federal complaint (see pp. 18 -19 below), it took six years from filing of <br />the complaint to the 10th Circuit decision that dismissed the case. Id. at 1408 -10. Thus, while <br />Colorado Water Users and Officials are convinced that Environmental Opposers' federal complaint <br />lacks merit and will ultimately be dismissed, we would be prejudiced by the lengthy delay in these <br />proceedings that any federal court action will inevitably produce. <br />' The extent to which objectors in this case would be bound by a federal court decision on the <br />quantification of the Black Canyon reserved right is debatable. <br />14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.