Laserfiche WebLink
entitlements and to develop future water projects and exchanges upstream of recreational in- channel <br />structures. Confirmation of the claimed water rights would essentially eliminate the constitutional <br />doctrine of maximum utilization from Colorado water law. For the foregoing reasons, the Water <br />Court's ruling should be reversed and the claimed water rights should be limited to 30 cfs in <br />accordance with the Fort Collins opinion. <br />Alternatively, if this Court finds that the claimed water rights are not necessarily limited to <br />30 cfs, the case must be remanded for a determination of whether the amounts claimed are <br />reasonable and appropriate under reasonably efficient practices to accomplish without waste the <br />purpose for which the appropriation is lawfully made, essentially determining the duty of water in <br />this instance. The Water Court failed to make these determinations, as required. by § 37- 92- 103(4), <br />10 C.R.S. (2001), in a manner consistent with existing law. <br />IV. AGRUMENT <br />A. INTRODUCTION. <br />In determining whether a valid appropriation exists in this. instance, the line of analysis <br />followed by this court in City of Thornton v. City of Fort Collins, 830 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1992) offers <br />the best road map. In other words, one needs to step through, in the appropriate sequence, the <br />various governing statutory provisions. <br />C:\DATA\Pilher \Golden Appeal\Full Brief 2 -7 -02 glmwpd 4 <br />February 7, 2002 (1:30pm) <br />