Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />a change would be largely irrelevant. However, while the <br />study does not consider abrogation or elimination of the <br />right to appropriate, numerous other changes are examined, <br />some of which would limit or condition appropriative rights. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />(2) Similarly, the water study does not consider shifting to <br />an administrative permit system for the initial appropria- <br />tion of water. The reason for this is the long-standing <br />tradition of a judicially based system. However, the <br />study does consider various changes which would apply to <br />applications for changes in water rights. Some of these <br />changes would give greater authority to state or local <br />government, or would give greater latitude to the water <br />court. Also considered is the establishment of new cri- <br />teria which water courts could use in reaching their <br />decisions. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />(3) The water study does not consider "forced" reallocations <br />of water by government edict, condemnation, or order, and <br />no wholesale reallocations of existing water rights are <br />considered. The study does look at ways to encourage or <br />discourage certain types of reallocations or transfers. <br />Because of current water use patterns and the realities <br />of market economics, it is assumed that most future water <br />transfers will come from irrigated agriculture, and the <br />tools considered tend to be those that might slow, <br />accelerate, or otherwise modify such transfers. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />It should be reiterated that an examination and analysis of any <br />tool does not imply approval or suggest that the tool be employed. <br />Whether the use of any given tool is appropriate will depend on the <br />projected consequences of its use, on the public perceptions as to <br />the desirability of those consequences, on the trade-offs between <br />different water uses, and on the magnitude of the legal or consti- <br />tutional problems, if any, which occur with its use. Thus, the sole <br />purpose of the legal analysis is to provide as full and complete <br />a basis as is possible for a public discussion about available, or <br />potentially available, ways to achieve alternative future water uses. <br />In summary, the legal studies must be considered as just one volume <br />of a series of reports. Although some of the legal studies may be <br />valuable in and of themselves, the bulk of the material has meaning <br />only when it is considered in the context of the water study as a <br />whole. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />This volume is organized into three sections: (1) a description <br />of Colorado water law and the various water authorities; (2) an analy- <br />sis of numerous means to influence water use, considering various <br />governmental and private actions, and including a survey of the water <br />laws of other states; and (3) an analysis and description of three <br />separate legal issues concerning the benefits and obligations of <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />xx <br /> <br />I <br />