My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Case No. 90SA514 Memorandum Brief of NCWCD in Support of Affirmance of Water Court Decision
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Case No. 90SA514 Memorandum Brief of NCWCD in Support of Affirmance of Water Court Decision
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/14/2010 1:12:22 PM
Creation date
6/11/2010 3:25:41 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Fort Collins and Thornton 86CW371
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
6/10/1991
Author
Davis, Graham & Stubbs
Title
Case No. 90SA514 Memorandum Brief of NCWCD in Support of Affirmance of Water Court Decision
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.
/
21
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
allow the passage of fish through or around man -made structures. <br />Here the boat chute and fish ladder are part of an existing <br />diversion dam which spans the river. <br />Fort Collins seeks to transform the purpose of passage <br />for which such structures are intended into an appropriative <br />water right which would call water past upstream future <br />appropriations and changes of water rights. If Fort Collins <br />succeeds in this portion of its application, any government, <br />private organization, or individual could effectively command a <br />substantial portion, if not all, of the remaining unappropriated <br />flow of a stream. The implications for further development of <br />Colorado's interstate compact and equitable apportionment <br />entitlements could be dramatic. Boat chutes and fish ladders at <br />or near State lines on the Rio Grande, Arkansas, Platte, and <br />Colorado mainstem and principal tributaries could command a <br />significant portion of the flows in perpetuity. <br />This Court and the United States Supreme Court have <br />carefully and cautiously defined federal reserved water rights. <br />See United States v. City and County of Denver 656 P.2d 1 (Colo. <br />1982) and United States v. New Mexico 438 U.S. 696 (1978). It <br />would be extremely ironic and adverse to Colorado's best interest <br />to confer upon Bureau of Land Management boat chutes, for <br />example, the status of qualifying for appropriative water rights <br />under Colorado law. <br />The legislature has explicitly stated that instream <br />flow appropriations are reserved to a State agency, the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board. See Colorado River Water Conservation <br />-3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.