Laserfiche WebLink
t ' <br />M � <br />about including the appropriation by an individual <br />for instream flows it just says the-state." <br />Rep. Forest Burns "In other words you wouldn't have <br />to conform then to the requirements of the <br />constitution - that says that you divert water and <br />apply it and then appropriate it for beneficial use. <br />Then I as an individual could appropriate the water <br />and leave in the stream if i wanted to -- right ?" <br />R- ego -rgan Smith "The term beneficial use is in the <br />constitution and the law -: -the state law .there is <br />considerable latitude in definition of that term. it <br />is not defined by the constitution -- -it has been <br />defined by subsequent Colorado Supreme Court's cases <br />and there is latitude in that term and that is as i <br />understand it is one of the bases For this bill." <br />Representati gd "x <br />will continue on down to the <br />next .page and 1 will leave all of this For the <br />record." <br />Remarks by Representative Richard Lamm: "I think, <br />Representative Burns, your concerns are with the <br />constitutionality of this thing, the minimum stream <br />flows. o one can <br />y guarantee the <br />constitutionality; in fact, we ought to take this up <br />in .the interrogatory to discuss this with <br />Representative Edmonds and the q uestion is that, on <br />our best counsel and advise from a lot of people, is <br />that probably it is not the solemn occasion that the <br />Supreme Court would take but if there were to be any <br />substantial feelings towards that I think that both <br />Rep. Edmunds and I would both agree that we ought to, <br />we would be happy to send interrogatories to the <br />Supreme Court'to see what they would think," Now <br />-3 <br />