Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />one feature of the project or system shall be considered in finding that reasonable diligence <br />has been shown in the development of water rights of the entire project or system." c.R.S. <br />937-92-301(4)(b). <br /> <br />9. In the six years preceding the filing of this Application, Applicants have diligently <br />pursued development of the supject conditional water rights and the Applicants' other <br />conditional rights. Examples of work done to establish diligence include: <br /> <br />a. Applicant has diverted and placed to beneficial use 0.2 c.f.s. of the Ewing <br />Spring for irrigation of the 4 acres described in the decree in Case No. <br />95CW160. <br /> <br />b. Applicants opposed several water rights applications during the diligence <br />period that could adversely affect the Ewing Spring, including Case Nos. <br />97CW002,OlCW239, OlCW240, and 01CW241. <br /> <br />c. Applicants adjudicated an augmentation plan in Case Nos. <br />95CW208/96CW209 (Consolidated) that allows continued use of the Ewing <br />Spring during times of senior call to ensure it can provide a dependable <br />domestic supply. <br /> <br />d. Applicants adjudicated the Ewing Pond in Case Nos. 96CW208/96CW209 <br />(Consolidated), which has its decreed source, among others, the Ewing <br />Spring. <br /> <br />e. Applicant continues to rely upon the Ewing Spring and has no intention to <br />abandon it. <br /> <br />II. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW <br /> <br />1. To the extent they constitute conclusions of law, the foregoing findings of fact are <br />fully incorporated herein. <br /> <br />2. Notice of the Application was properly given. The Court has jurisdiction over the <br />Application and over all persons or entities who had standing to appear, even though they <br />did not do so. <br /> <br />CASE No. 03CW37 <br />APPLICANTS: BART AND MARY I<A TIfERINE EWING <br />FINDINGS OF FACf, RULING OF REFEREE, AND JUOCMEm' AND DECREE OF WATER COURT <br />PAGE 3 <br />