FLOOD08207

• County: Statewide
• Community: State of Colorado
• Basin: Statewide
• Title: Water and Power Authority - Project Summaries
• Date: 8/4/1992
• Prepared For: State of Colorado
• Prepared By: CWCB
• Floodplain - Doc Type: Projects ‎(non-floodplain)‎

.._--~"... ,~

. -

.-rh~ "fftc,?1 valtln' ~f /111~ Ch'1dd1t~~.o..A-e(' l~

80 - c. W - ;J..lJ""S

DISTRICT COURT,

WATER DIVISION NO.6, STATE OF COLORADO
FllS!J 'NA7ER DIV .
-(~,;, ':' '; r ",..,1)'( rr )),r ) :111"lfr I STAT::::F Ct::l":F!~,...::I('
rirr"l~(.. .... J

Case No. 83-CW-33

REFEREE'S RULING - DUE DILIGENCE

. i ~'''.J r':.~~

IN THE MATTER OF THE AFPLICAT!CN FOR \'/ATER RIGHTS OF:

City of Steambo~: Sorings

IN ROUTT COUNTY, STATE OF COLOR~DO

The above cactione~ Ar-plication was filed on March 31, 1989
and was referred to the water referee in accordance with Sections
37-92-101, et seq., C.R.S. The water referee, having made such
investigations as are necessary to determine whether or not the
s~atements in the Ap~ 1 i cat i on are true and hav i ng become fu 11 y
advised with respect to the subject matter of the Application does
hereby make the following determination and Ruling:

1. The statements in the Application are true.

2. The name of the sr.ructure is:

Fish Creek Reservoir

3. The name and :ddress of the Applicant are:

Ci~y of Steamboar. Spr1r.gs
P.O. Sox 775088
137 10th Street
Steamboat Sarin~s. CO 80477

4. On March 16, 1981 in Case No. BO-C~-255. the Water Referee for
Water Division Ne. 6 a~~rded to ~he Applicant a conditional water
right in the amount of 200u acr9 f~et to be used for water storage
with an appropriation date :Jf 12/16/1980. The Applicant was
directed to file a~ A~oljcation for Quadrennial Finding of
Reasonable Diligence in the development of this conditional water
right in March, 1985 to maintain the conditional water right in
full force and effect. This Ruling of Referee was confirmed and
made a Decree of the Court on April 30, 1981.

5. During the interve~ing years, at timely intervals as required
by statute, the Applicant has shown to the Court that reasonable
diligence has been exercised in the development of this conditional
water right, and the Court has ruled that said water right be
continued in full force and effect.

!
t
;

6. On March 31, 1989, as directed by the Court in the last
previous finding of reasonable diligence, the Applicant filed an

~