CWCB San Miguel PHS Final - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

B. LEGAL CLAIMS 1) Staff's recommendation for the San Miguel River ISF meets all of the procedural requirements of the ISF Rules. 2) ISF Rule 5j.(3) provides that "[i]n a hearing on a contested ISF appropriation, a Party may raise only those issues relevant to the statutory determinations required by section 37-92 - 102(3)(c) and the required findings in Rule 5i." The required findings are: (1) that there is a natural environment that can be preserved to a reasonable degree with the Board's water right if granted; (2) that the natural environment will be preserved to a reasonable degree by the water available for the appropriation to be made; and (3) that such environment can exist without material injury to water rights. 3) To implement section 37- 92- 102(3)(b), C.R.S., staff recommends including language in the CWCB's ISF water court application and decree stating that "pursuant to section 37-92 - 102(3)(b), C.R.S. (2010), this instream flow appropriation shall be subject to the present uses or exchanges of water being made by other water users, pursuant to appropriation or practices in existence on the date of this appropriation, whether or not previously confirmed by court order or decree." Staff also recommends including a provision in the decree specifically identifying such uses if the proponent provides adequate documentation and verification of the uses within 6 months from the date of filing the ISF water court application. Staff recommends that after receiving verification, the decree include the description of the claimed use so the Division of Water Resources knows to administer the instream flow water right as junior to the existing use, such as the following language: Based upon the affidavit of James Diverter and discussions with the Water Commissioner, the CWCB agrees that James Diverter's diversion of water from Wet Creek for the first fill of and storage in Beautiful Pond in the amount of 5.05 acre -feet, and use of said stored water for irrigation of Mr. Diverter's acres of land, were uses of water in existence on the date the CWCB appropriated the instream flow water right applied for herein. The CWCB's instream flow water right described herein is subject to Mr. Diverter's water use described above pursuant to section 37- 92- 102(3)(b). The limited subordination of the instream flow water right to Mr. Diverter's preexisting water use pursuant to section 37-92 - 102(3)(b) in this case shall not interfere with the administration of Mr. Diverter's water rights as against other water rights, and shall not result in general subordination of the CWCB's ISF water right decreed herein to any other water rights junior to that instream flow water right. 4) The instream flow right will not deprive the people of the state of Colorado of the beneficial use of those waters available by law and interstate compact. While ISF Rule 5j.(3) does not include this as an issue that may be raised at the hearing (see (2) above), it is an important policy issue for the Board. The proposed instream flow water right will not deprive the people of the state of Colorado of the beneficial use of waters available by law and interstate compact. A significant volume of water will remain available for new junior water rights and future water development. While that fact alone results in no deprivation, the CWCB went further to meet this standard by giving the people of the San