My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Case No. 90SA514 Thornton v. Fort Collins
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Case No. 90SA514 Thornton v. Fort Collins
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2010 2:16:55 PM
Creation date
6/17/2010 10:27:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
RICD Legislation - SB 37
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
4/20/1992
Author
West Group, Supreme Court of Colorado
Title
Case No. 90SA514 Thornton v. Fort Collins
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.
/
18
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
830 P.2d 915, City of Thornton By and Through Utilities Bd. v. City of Fort Collins, (Colo. 1992) Page 15 <br />• <br />is for a beneficial use. <br />A beneficial use is defined in section 37- 92- 103(4), <br />15 C.R.S. (1990), as: <br />the use of that amount of water that is reasonable <br />and appropriate under reasonably efficient <br />practices to accomplish without waste the purpose <br />for which the appropriation is lawfully made and, <br />without limiting the generality of the foregoing, <br />includes the impoundment of water for recreational <br />purposes, including fishery or wildlife. For the <br />benefit and enjoyment of present and future <br />generations, "beneficial use" shall also include the <br />appropriation by the state of Colorado in the <br />manner prescribed by law of such minimum flows <br />between specific points or levels for and on natural <br />streams and lakes as are required to preserve the <br />natural environment to a reasonable degree. <br />This statute provides that water appropriated for <br />municipal, recreational, piscatorial, fishery, and <br />wildlife purposes is water put to beneficial uses. <br />As to the appropriation of a minimum stream flow, <br />in 1987 the General Assembly amended section <br />37 -92- 102(3) and vested the CWCB with "exclusive" <br />authority to appropriate "minimum stream flows" <br />and "natural surface water levels or volumes for <br />natural lakes." See 1987 Colo. Sess. Laws, ch. 269 <br />at 1305 -06. Section 37 -92- 102(3) in relevant part <br />now reads: <br />Further recognizing the need to correlate the <br />activities of mankind with some reasonable <br />preservation of the natural environment, the <br />Colorado water conservation board is hereby <br />vested with the exclusive authority, on behalf of <br />the people of the state of Colorado, to appropriate <br />in a manner consistent with sections 5 and 6 of <br />Article XVI of the state constitution, such waters <br />of natural streams and lakes as the board <br />determines may be required for minimum stream <br />flows or for natural surface water levels or <br />volumes for natural lakes to preserve the natural <br />environment to a reasonable degree. In the <br />adjudication of water rights pursuant to this article <br />and other applicable law, no other person or entity <br />shall be granted a decree adjudicating a right to <br />water or interests in water for instream flows in a <br />stream channel between specific points, or for <br />natural surface water levels or volumes for natural <br />lakes, for any purpose whatsoever. <br />The exclusive authority vested in the CWCB to <br />appropriate minimum stream flows does not detract <br />from the right to divert and to put to beneficial use <br />unappropriated waters by removal or control. See <br />Colo. Const., Art. XVI, § 6. <br />[24] Thus, according to the plain language of the <br />foregoing statutes, we hold that water may be <br />appropriated by a structure or device which either <br />removes water *931 away from its natural course <br />or location and towards another course or location <br />or which controls water within its natural - <br />watercourse, assuming such action puts the water to <br />beneficial use. The type of beneficial use to which <br />the controlled water is put may mean that the water <br />must remain in its natural course. This is not an <br />appropriation of a minimum stream flow, an <br />appropriation given exclusively to the CWCB. A <br />minimum stream flow does not require removal or <br />control of water by some structure or device. A <br />minimum stream flow between two points on a <br />stream or river usually signifies the complete <br />absence of a structure or device. Furthermore, that <br />an appropriation of a minimum stream flow by the <br />CWCB must put that stream flow to the beneficial <br />use of the preservation of nature does not mean that <br />the beneficial uses to which waters controlled by <br />some structure or device may not also redound to <br />the preservation of piscatorial and other natural <br />resources. Although controlling water within its <br />natural course or location by some structure or <br />device may effect a result which is similar to a <br />minimum flow, that does not mean that the <br />appropriation effected by the structure is invalid <br />under the Act. When the application of water to <br />beneficial use is effected by some structure or <br />device, the resulting appropriation is by a diversion <br />within the meaning of the Act. <br />[25] [26] The issue then is whether the <br />appropriation of water effected by the Nature Dam <br />is a removal or control of water for beneficial use <br />within the meaning of the foregoing statutes. The <br />water court found that the Nature Dam removes <br />Poudre River water from its natural course or <br />location and puts that water to a beneficial use. We <br />agree. As on the issue of relation back of the 1988 <br />amendments to the 1986 application, Thornton again <br />argues that Fort Collins's persistent intent to <br />appropriate minimum stream flows means that the <br />appropriation at the Nature Dam is an invalid <br />appropriation. To be sure, re- labeling what is <br />Copyright (c) West Group 1999 No claim to original U.S. Govt. works <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.