Deposition of Ted Kowalski

• Description: Case No. 00CW259 Vail RICD and Case No. 00CW281 Breckenridge RICD
• State: CO
• Basin: Colorado Mainstem
• Water Division: 5
• Date: 3/12/2002
• Author: District Court, Water Division No. 5
• Title: Deposition of Ted Kowalski
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Court Documents

Application for Water Rights of the Eagle River Water & Sanitation
March 12, 2002
Ted Kowalski
Page 126
Page 128
1
does it?
1
application for water rights should not be
2
MR. CYRAN: Objection to foundation.
2
granted and why they should be granted only in
3
A. That's correct, it doesn't
3
part or on certain conditions.
4
explicitly state in-channel recreational uses,
4
Q. Are there any other grounds upon
5
but this statement here talked -- afterwards
5
which -- upon why the water rights should not be
6
talks about impoundment of water for
6
granted, to your knowledge?
7
recreational purposes.
7
A. To my knowledge, these are the main
8
Q. (BY MR. PORZAK) All right. But
8
reasons. Arguably, Item D in the 00281 case and
9
there's nothing in the foregoing that mentions
9
E in the 00259 case could be made more explicit
10
other recreational uses, correct?
10
in that the board is going to hold the applicant
11
A. Not in this section here.
11
to strict proof that the amounts they're seeking
12
Q. You have provided us with a video of
12
are for reasonable amounts, reasonable and
13
the Vail and Breckenridge white-water courses,
13
appropriate amounts to accomplish the purposes
14
correct?
14
without waste under reasonably efficient
15
A. That's correct.
15
practices.
16
Q. And when was this video shot?
16
Q. Now, Ted, today, Glenn asked
17
A. I believe it was shot on May 21st,
17
Mr. Porzak asked you a number of questions about
18
2001.
18
when water flowing through the Vail white-water
19
Q. Okay. And, again, do you know what
19
course and the Breckenridge white-water course
20
the flows were when you shot the video?
20
is altered, and he sometimes used the word
21
A. I believe the Vail flows were in the
21
"controlled." What is the board's position with
22
400 range, and I believe the Breckenridge were
22
respect to when water is controlled by either
23
in the 200 range.
23
the Vail or the Breckenridge course?
24
Q. And do you know what time of day the
24
A. The board's position that neither
25
video was shot?
25
the Breckenridge nor the Vail courses control
Page 127
Page 129
1
A. Yeah, they were the Vail course
1
the water as required by law.
2
was shot in the morning, and the Breckenridge
2
Q. All right. Are there any flows
3
course was shot in the afternoon.
3
you're aware of at which they control water?
4
Q. And you were at the courses, 1
4
A. No.
5
believe you testified, approximately one hour?
5
Q. Do the courses sometimes alter the
6
A. About an hour each, yeah.
6
flow of water?
7
MR. PORZAK: Okay. I have no other
7
A. Courses may alter the flow of water,
8
questions.
8
but that doesn't mean that they control
9
MR. CYRAN: Okay. I've just got a
9
underneath the legal definition of control of
10
couple.
10
the water.
11
EXAMINATION
11
Q. Okay. Ted -- Mr. Kowalski, does
12
BY MR. CYRAN:
12
you mentioned that the CWCB intends to hold the
13
Q. Okay. Ted, I'm looking at what's
13
applicants to strict proof that the courses
14
been marked Deposition Exhibit No. 18 and
14
are -- claim amounts that are reasonable and
15
Deposition Exhibit No. 19. Do you still have a
15
appropriate to accomplish the intended purpose.
16
copy of those?
16
Does the CWCB intend to produce evidence that
17
A. Yes.
17
the courses are -- or would -- let me start
18
Q. And those are the statement of
18
over. Excuse me.
19
opposition -- what are those?
19
What evidence will the CWCB be
20
A. Those are the statements of
20
rely upon to show that the courses claim amounts
21
opposition of the CWCB in Case No. OOCW259 and
21
that are not reasonable and appropriate to
22
Case No. OOCW281, both in Division 5.
22
accomplish the intended purpose?
23
Q. And under No. 3 on both of those
23
A. CWCB could offer evidence in the
24
exhibits, what is -- what is set forth?
24
form of testimony by any of the applicants'
25
A. These are the facts why the
25
expert witnesses, as well as rebuttal testimony
33 (Pages 126 to 129)
Esquire Deposition Services
[phone]