Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MR. VANDEMOER: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. VANDEMOER: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />then between or among Water districts? Let's <br />say. for example, that we have three districts <br />on the South Platte. There is an adjudica~ <br />tion proceeding in District #1 in 1890. an <br />adjudication proceeding in District #2 in <br />1895. and in District #3 in 1900. these being <br />the first adjudication proceedings in each <br />of those districts. What are the relative <br />rights among those districts? The law doesn't <br />say. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Every water division engineer has applied <br />the principle that the original adjudication <br />suits were considered as though held at the <br />same time. Then what about four or five sub- <br />sequent suits? What is the relationship <br />between them? This is where there is hope- <br />less confusion as to the priorities of subse- <br />quent or supplemental adjudication suits. <br />There is no law. <br /> <br />For the first time in history in Colorado. <br />last year on the Rio Grande Rfver junior <br />decrees were curtailed to satisfy the demands <br />of the Rio Grande compact. The problem is, <br />what junior decrees do we curtail? The same <br />situation will occur under the Colorado River <br />Compacts. Unless we-can define the priorities <br />as among water districts on the same river we <br />will continue to dig ourselves into a deeper <br />mess. <br /> <br />What We have done in this bill is to <br />apply the principle the .legislature has <br />already announced as being applicable within <br />one water district." <br /> <br />"Thank you." <br /> <br />"Does that answer your question?" <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"That's a start." <br /> <br />"Mr. Maynes from Durango offered to <br />plain this in detail and we may ask him <br />give us his interpretationl <br /> <br />ex- <br />to <br />