Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Decree of the Court

Home Browse Search

For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that the recreational experiences sought by the City are objectively reasonable on the Yampa River and that the claimed flows are the minimum necessary to accomplish the beneficial uses described in paragraph 6.h above during each time interval for which water is claimed. k. Statutory RICD Provisions Pursuant to § 37- 92- 102(6)(a), the CWCB held a timely public hearing regarding the City's application and considered the five statutory factors found in C.R.S. § 37- 92- 102(6)(b)(I) -(V). The CWCB made a final recommendation to the Court on those factors. The Court finds that the City is entitled to an absolute water right for the Boating Park RICD under the five factors set out below: i. Compact Impairment In its Findings and Recommendations in this matter, the CWCB concluded: Adjudication and administration of the RICD will not impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and put to consumptive beneficial use its compact entitlements because the amount of the claimed RICD can either be used downstream of the RICD or contribute in part to the delivery obligation of Article 13 of the Upper Colorado River Compact. The City also presented the testimony of Mr. Gary Thompson, water resources engineer, and his letter report dated January 20, 2004, and the testimony from Dr. Jeris Danielson, the former Colorado State Engineer, and his letter report dated April 18, 2005, that the adjudication and administration of the Boating Park RICD will not impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and place to consumptive beneficial use its compact entitlement. The Court concurs with the CWCB's findings and recommendations on this issue and the testimony and reports of Mr. Thompson and Dr. Danielson. Accordingly, the Court determines that the adjudication and administration of the Boating Park RICD will not impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and put to consumptive beneficial use the State's compact entitlements. C.R.S.§ 37 -92 -102 (6)(b)(I). ii. Stream Reach Appropriateness The Court finds that the Boating Park RICD is located in an appropriate reach of the Yampa River for the intended uses. C.R.S. § 37- 92 -102 (6)(b)(II). Most relevant to this issue is the fact that the reach selected for the Boating Park RICD was dictated by the recreation needs the City sought to meet, the area geography, and the City's overall river management objectives. In this regard, the Court takes note of the City's Yampa River Management Plan which was over three years in the making, and the testimony of Mr. Neumann which explains the Management Plan. That Management Plan dictates the appropriate stream reach for the Boating Park RICD to disperse various competing recreation activities on the Yampa River and meet the City's objectives for the Yampa River. -6- tk0236