Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate

• Description: SB01-216
• State: CO
• Basin: South Platte
• Water Division: 1
• Date: 1/1/3000
• Title: Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Legislation

• in the bill. It defines recreational in- channel diversion to
[unintelligible] only the minimum flow necessary to support the
recreational activity can be sought with physical controls for
structures defining the upstream and downstream extent of their
rights. The waters are to be controlled by the applicant in the
identified reach with applicant holding an ownership interest in the
lands abutting the reach.
`By way of example, this would mean that the applicant could
potentially obtain a right to the minimum amount of water necessary
to float a kayak for a constructed course consisting of boat chutes
within the reach. [unintelligible] reasonable recreation experience
while ensuring that the entire flow of the reach is not dedicated to
this [unintelligible]. It is anticipated that under the bill the CWCB
will establish further criteria governing such diversions such as
additional guidance upon the appropriate time of day, season of use,
length of reach- and minimum utilization demand in order that
additional objective benchmarks for judging the proprietary of such
appropriations are established.
"The bill bestows upon the CWCB the obligation to review
• applications for recreational in- channel diversion and to submit its
• recommendations thereon to the water court prior to the entry of any
decree therefore. It provides statutory criteria for the CWCB to
follow in fulfilling such responsibilities. It requires the water court
not only to consider the recommendations of the CWCB relative to
the grant or denial of the application, but that the courts specifically
take into account the criteria set forth in Section 37, 92, 102, (5) (b)
including as such may be subsequently supplemented by the CWCB
for rule making.
"Finally, nothing in Senate Bill 216 is intended to create a water
right which did not previously exist by virtue of state Supreme Court
interpretation of Colorado statutes or to affect any impending
challenges to applications for rights of this nature to the extent such
challenges are found to be meritorious under existing law. Further,
nothing hereon is intended to modify the rights of owners of real
property, including the beds and banks of streams as such may now
exist."
That is the statement. Clearly it was written by attorneys and they
did not read it out loud. [crosstalk]
Mme. Chair: Thank you, Representative Spradley.
•
May 7, 2001
Page 2