Laserfiche WebLink
(Colo. 1999) (Supreme Court's goal in construing a statute is to ascertain and carry out the intent of <br />the legislature). <br />1. Stateline Impacts. <br />If one needs merely to direct the flow within a channel or to create whitewater features by <br />the placement of rocks or other momentary flow impediments in the stream in order to "control" the <br />water within its natural course or location and thereby effectuate an appropriation that would <br />command and control the entire stream, then a significant portion, or even all of Colorado's <br />remaining compact entitlements, could be "consumed" by the placement of such structures at or near <br />the stateline. By way of example, for what would constitute minimal financial investment in terms <br />of actual cost and cost per acre foot of water, an individual or entity could create a "recreation" <br />amenity on the mainstem of the Colorado River below Grand Junction and thereby "call" hundreds <br />of thousands of acre feet of water down to the stateline, precluding further upstream water <br />development, including both in -basin and transbasin diversions, in one of Colorado's few remaining <br />basins that is not fully appropriated.' It would make no difference that recreational boating could <br />have occurred either without the structures or at very low flows, as the structures would merely need <br />to enhance the experience or somehow redirect the flow in order to constitute beneficial use of <br />available water by means of "diversion." <br />' Similar such structures could be placed upon the other tributary streams which <br />contribute to the state's Colorado River compact delivery obligations. <br />CADATATifheAGolden AppealTull Brief 2 -7 -02 gImwpd <br />February 7, 2002 (1:30pm) 9 <br />