Laserfiche WebLink
prove that the amount of water claimed had been put to beneficial use within the meaning of <br />section 37 -92- 103(4), as discussed below. <br />C. The Amounts Claimed by Golden and Awarded by the Water Court Are Not <br />Beneficial as Defined in Section 37 -92- 103(4). <br />Water can be appropriated by diverting water or by otherwise controlling water and can <br />be adjudicated, "assuming that the resultant use is beneficial." Fort Collins, 830 P.2d at 929. <br />"Beneficial use," at the time Golden filed its application, was defined in section 37 -92- 103(4) as <br />the use of that amount of water that is reasonable and appropriate <br />under reasonably efficient practices to accomplish without waste <br />the purpose for which the appropriation is lawfully made and, <br />without limiting the generality of the foregoing, includes the <br />impoundment of water for recreational purposes, including fishery <br />or wildlife .... (Emphasis added) <br />In Fort Collins, the Court said that "[tNs statute provides that water appropriated for <br />municipal, recreational, piscatorial, fishery, and wildlife uses is water put to beneficial uses." <br />Fort Collins, 830 P.2d at 930. However, a careful reading of the statute reveals that it does not <br />mention municipal use and only states that beneficial use includes the impoundment of water for <br />recreational purposes, including fishery and wildlife. This is not to say that municipal use is not <br />a beneficial use or that in- channel use for recreational purposes, including fishery or wildlife, <br />cannot be a beneficial use, but only that this statute does not so provide. Rather, as this Court <br />has recognized, beneficial use is a question of fact and depends upon the circumstances of each <br />case. City and County of Denver v. Sheriff, 105 Colo. 193, 204, 96 P.2d 836, 842 (1939). <br />>, t �„ 7_M_1 (1 (1\ ;,,mot ��c fnur elemFn,tc• The ncP <br />"Beneficial use," as def�:.� .. _ _ _ _ ._ . . , <br />must be an amount of water that is (a) reasonable and appropriate (b) under reasonably efficient <br />practices (c) to accomplish the purpose for which the appropriation is lawfully made (d) without <br />waste. These elements are not defined in the 1969 Act, but take their meaning from prior cases. <br />Schodde v. Twin Falls Land & Water Co., 224 U.S. 107, 117 (1912); Empire Water & Power Co. <br />15 <br />