My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Board Meeting 10/01/1987
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
Board Meeting 10/01/1987
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:15:53 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:15:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
10/1/1987
Description
CWCB Meeting
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
373
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br />NFS lands on the San Isabel and Pike National Forests in Water <br />Division 2 and the San Juan National Forest in Water Division.7. <br /> <br />The Water Court in Water Division 2 granted summary judgment in favor <br />of the State of Colorado and several other objectors on the basis that <br />the decision of the Colorado Supreme Court in United States v. Denver, <br />656 P.2d 1, 22-23 (Colo. 1982) barred such claims under the doctrines <br />of collateral estoppel and stare decisis. The United States appealed <br />to the Colorado Supreme Court. Briefs have been filed and oral argu- <br />ments were heard on July 1, 1987. It is, therefore uncertain whether <br />the United States will be allowed to present claims for instream flow <br />to protect the primary purposes of the National Forests. This issue <br />is moot in Water Division 4, 5, and 6 because the Water Court has <br />entered final judgment following the decision in United States v. <br />Denver, supra. <br /> <br />c. <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Soard Instream Flows and Lake Levels <br /> <br />It is unclear at this time w~ether any entity other t~an the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board can make an appropriation for an instream <br />flow or minimum lake level. The Board does have many water rights in <br />the various wilderness areas to protect the environment to a "reason- <br />able degree." However, the quantities appropriated appear to be <br />primarily for fisheries purposes and would need to be evaluated in a <br />.specific situation to determine whether such quantities would be <br />meaningful for wilderness water resource protection. <br /> <br />In any event, as we have alr@ady pOinted out, assertion of any kind of <br />water right is not a necessary means of protection of the water <br />resources of the 24 wilderne~s areas at issue in this case. <br /> <br />--. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.