Laserfiche WebLink
judicial economy, but instead would further delay this long - delayed quantification, most likely <br />resulting in vacating the trial date and continuing the pall of uncertainty that the Black Canyon <br />reserved right casts over water rights in the Gunnison Basin. Finally, the Environmental Opposers <br />are not without a remedy: to the extent any of their challenges to the federal applicants have merit, <br />the United States Supreme Court has stated that it retains the ability to review all state court <br />decisions concerning reserved rights. See Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United <br />States, 424 U.S. 800, 813 (1976) ( "Colorado River'). <br />II. ACCORDING TO CONGRESSIONAL POLICY AND COLORADO AND UNITED <br />STATES SUPREME COURT DECISIONS, THIS COURT SHOULD EXERCISE ITS <br />JURISDICTION TO QUANTIFY THE BLACK CANYON RESERVED RIGHT. <br />As explained above, Environmental Opposers ask the federal district court to order the <br />United States "to secur[e] river flows for the Black Canyon in quantities and with the frequencies <br />necessary" to fulfill the purposes of the Black Canyon. See Federal Complaint at 24. To grant this <br />relief, the federal court would necessarily have to determine the quantities and the frequencies of <br />water needed to fulfill the purposes for which the Black Canyon was reserved. Jurisdiction over this <br />task, however, has already been assigned to and secured by this Court. Acquiescing in <br />Environmental Opposers' attempt to move this determination to federal court by staying this case <br />would be contrary to law and prejudicial to the other objectors. <br />4 <br />