My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
56 (H) Motion for Determination of Question of Law (2)
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
4001-5000
>
56 (H) Motion for Determination of Question of Law (2)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/15/2010 1:22:00 PM
Creation date
7/7/2010 3:22:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
Case No. 00CW259 Vail RICD and Case No. 00CW281 Breckenridge RICD
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
3/8/2002
Author
Ken Salazar, Susan Schneider
Title
56 (H) Motion for Determination of Question of Law
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.
/
7
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
(Exhibit A (written statement), attached hereto, p. 3 <br />(emphasis added)). <br />Senator McCormick also noted that, except for instream flows, water rights are <br />appropriated by the use of diversion structures or dams. <br />The chief concern about embarking on an instream flow <br />program was that instream flow appropriations are <br />designed to keep water in the stream, whereas Colorado <br />water law encourages the maximum utilization of water for <br />a variety of beneficial uses which normally involve the <br />placement of dams and diversion structures in streams. <br />(Exhibit A (written statement), p. 1, (emphasis added)). <br />At the hearing on SB 212, Representative Paulson expressed concern that other <br />entities were claiming instream flows for uses such as recreation without having to divert <br />or store the water. He stated: <br />The unfortunate circumstance we find today in 1987 is that <br />people have usurped the original good public purpose of <br />allowing the Conservation Board to make appropriations on <br />behalf of the public in general to enhance and protect the <br />environment and are now filing instream water rights for <br />any number of purposes not on behalf of the people of the <br />state of Colorado, but in many instances for purposes <br />that range all the way from a flow for recreation <br />purposes for their own even [though] they don't own the <br />land or the riparian rights, to other purposes such as <br />blocking the construction of water projects. <br />(Transcript of House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, <br />and Natural Resources, June 4, 1987 (emphasis added) <br />hereinafter referred to as "Exhibit B," as attached hereto). <br />Representative Paulson also stated: <br />If you have an instream flow water right where there's no <br />diversion involved and there is no requirement of the <br />showing of the attempting to use that water and capture <br />it you will have the entire gambit of speculation thrown <br />open again because there will be no objective test to figure <br />who's sincere and who's really trying to come up with a <br />valuable water right. (Exhibit B, p. 5 (emphasis added)). <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.