Laserfiche WebLink
argue that water supplies in the San <br />Luis Valley are over - appropriated, and <br />that ground water management rules <br />are necessary to maintain a sustainable <br />aquifer in the Rio Grande Basin. <br />Opponents argue the rules are <br />unconstitutional, violating individuals' <br />rights to appropriate water, that water is <br />available in the basin for appropriation, <br />and that new water applications should <br />be given the opportunity to develop <br />augmentation plans rather than replace <br />new withdrawals at a one - for -one ratio <br />as required in the rules. <br />Much eof the testimony during the <br />trial focused on the Rio Grande Decision <br />Support System, a comprehensive <br />computer model designed to meet <br />state legislators' mandate for a specific <br />study of the San Luis Valley's complex <br />hydrology. This model is expected to <br />be used to calculate the impact of any <br />proposed new withdrawals from the <br />valley's aquifers. State witnesses such <br />as Willem Schreuder, who developed <br />the model, testified to its accuracy and <br />reliability while protesters' witnesses <br />such as groundwater modeling expert <br />Charles Norris testified the model was <br />flawed and unreliable, particularly for <br />predictive purposes. <br />Witnesses including Colorado <br />Division of Water Resources Chief Deputy <br />Ken Knox and Registered Professional <br />Engineer Allen Davey testified the val- <br />ley's aquifer systems are currently not <br />in a sustainable condition, and the pro- <br />posed state rules are necessary to bring <br />the system back into balance. <br />Closing arguments are currently <br />scheduled for Friday afternoon, March <br />24, in Alamosa. Judge Kuenhold has <br />no specific deadline to render a deci- <br />sion but said he would make a ruling as <br />soon as possible following the conclu- <br />sion of the trial. <br />