BOARD01816 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 6 9. Golden Boat Chute case, appeal to Colorado Supreme Court. Issue: Whether the Colorado Supreme Court should overturn the water court's decision in this case. The Water Court granted Golden its entire requested appropriation for up to 1000 cfs, including nighttime and winter uses. Discussion: The trial transcript is now expected *0 be completed at the end of November 2001. Once the transcript is filed, the Opening Brief will be due 45 days later. We are working with a number of entities to encourage their participation in the appeal as amicus curiae on behalf of the CWCB and the SEO. 10, Sportsman's Ranch ("SPCUP") South Park Conjunctive Use Pro.iect, 96CW14, Division 1. , . Issue: The application proposed a so-called conjunctive use project in South Park. Applicant proposed to pump ground water to create a void in the aquifer, then divert surface water into the aquifer for storage and later withdrawal. The City of Aurora contracted with the Applicant for use of the withdrawn water. On June 1,2001, the Water Court issued an Order Dismissing Application, pursuant to C.R.C.P. 41(b)(1). The Court found that the groundwater , model offered by Applicant was unrelia)Jle, and therefore the Applicant could not meet its initial burden. The Court also took issue with aspects of Applicant's surface water modeling. Di~cussion: Post-trial motions were filed Septemb~r 14. The main fight now is over costs and . a motion by objectors for attorneys' fees under Rule II. No word yet on whether Applicant , plans to appeal. In its post-trial motions Applicant sought to introduce more evidence by way of affidavit to support arguments that are very similar to those originally rejected by the trial court. The Objectors including the state opposed this attempt to reopen the record, and a decision on this issue is pending. 11. Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Keys, No. 99 C~ 1320, NM Federal District Court. Issue: Will water users on the upper and middle Rio Grande be forced to by-pass flows to keep the river bed wet and protect fish under the Endangered Species Act? Discussion: Several environmental groups (Defenders of Wildlife, Sierra Club, Forest Guardians, Audubon Society, and the Southwest Enyironmental Center) filed suit against the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers. ,The federal agencies asserted in a biological I assessment that they have little discretion to make releases from federal reservoirs for the silvery I minnow and willow flycatcher, because of constraitj,ts by Compacts, federal law and existing contracts. The environmental groups filed a motion for preliminary injunction in April to assure that water remained flowing in the river through the irrigation season. The Court ordered mediation and issued a gag order as to the negotiations. The parties were able to negotiate a stipulation providing water to thr minnow, using some of Albuquerque's San Juan-Chama contract water by exchange, conserve~ water by the Middle Rio Grande .