BOARD01483

• Board Meeting Date: 7/24/2000
• Description: ISF Section - Recreational Instream Flows - Policy Discussion
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

.

.

.

....i.c.it....

fiW~>"~...>.~~~k
. ',oj, A.. .'-""J.
~'./l' /~:
. ", _. .
...:~....,..,......./:.:
'.:?fO'R.,\..tI~..
........

Cledr Creek County
POST OFFICE BOX 2000
GEORGETOWN. GOLORADO 80444

TELEPHONE: [phone] . <30m 679-2300

RECEI"'::I)

JUt 1 3 7!)nn
C COlorado "
~nse '<,
"'aUon 80-...
Ll.q

July 12,2000

Mr. Greg Welcher
Director of the Department of Natural Resources
Department of Natural Resources
1313 Sherman St., Room 718
Denver, CO 80203

RE: State Opposition to City of Golden Application in Case No. 98CW448, Water Division I

Dear Mr. Welcher:

We are writing to request the State's support in opposing the City of Golden's pending Water
Application in Case No. 98CW448 for its kayak course, The County's engineer has previously
sent you a letter regarding this Application, but we would also like to express our grave concerns
directly to you regarding this matter,

As you know, the Application seeks to appropriate virtually all remaining flows in Clear Creek
for a kayak course downstream of Clear Creek County. If this Application is granted, future
development of any junior water rights in Clear Creek County would be precluded, which would
be devastating to the County.

It is our understanding that CWCB has discussed this Application and is continuing to debate
whether it should actively oppose it. We urge CWCB to vigorously oppose the Application for
numerous reasons.

The Application should be opposed as contrary to existing law. The City of Golden is relying on
the Supreme Court decision in the City of Thornton v. City of Fort Collins, 830 P,2d 915 (Colo.
1992) to support its claims that water can be appropriated by using structures to control the water
in its natural course and applying it to beneficial use. The Fort Collins case concerned flows of
only 55 cfs, while the City of Golden's Application is for 1,000 cfs during the spring and
summer months, The issue in this case is not whether water can be appropriated by using
structures to control the water in its natural course, but whether an appropriation that will control
an entire water shed for kayaking purposes is "reasonable and appropriate under reasonably
efficient practices to accomplish without waste the purpose for which the appropriation is
lawfully made." That is the definition for "beneficial use," and it is Clear Creek County's
position that the amount of water which Golden claims is not reasonable or appropriate. For
instance, in January through April, Golden claims 75 to 255 cfs is sufficient for kayaking
purposes, Under existing law, Golden should not be permitted to appropriate 1,000 cfs during
the entire summer,