Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br />Board to look at. Seems to me it directs them to look <br /> <br />specifically at the effect of construction in the streambed. <br /> <br />So I think that's another aspect. <br />As to the water rights, the district does in fact have <br /> <br /> <br />a 1975 water right; admittedly a junior water right, but <br /> <br /> <br />senior to a lot that have been granted during the last years <br /> <br /> <br />in the South Platte. <br /> <br /> <br />Indirectly that water right is totally negated if <br /> <br /> <br />Fish and Wildlife was allowed to prevail. Today it's a 1975 <br /> <br /> <br />water right. Tomorrow, who knows whose priority is going to <br /> <br /> <br />be affected. <br /> <br />The last item that David mentioned and that's, you <br /> <br />know, what is the potential or the thrust that Nebraska may <br /> <br />take? Nebraska just in the last week handed a very much of <br />a landmark decision from their Supreme Court. <br />Historically transbasin diversions -- John, you'll like <br />this -- in Nebraska had been illegal up until'last week, at <br /> <br />which time their Supreme Court said, "No, they are in fact <br /> <br />legal." <br />So I think Nebraska is going to be looking at what <br /> <br />potential uses there may be for water that's in the South <br /> <br />Platte in terms of exporting it to other basins. So they <br /> <br />may not be quite as interested in fighting us in the case <br /> <br />because they're going to have some folks taking that water <br /> <br />and moving it somewhere. <br />