Laserfiche WebLink
<br />co <br />.-4 <br />en <br />,;;J <br />o <br />':.::.") <br /> <br />The fact of being a mutual irrigation company organized as a <br /> <br />special purpose corporation under the Ditch and Reservoir <br /> <br />Companies Act lends to the Company characteristics which <br /> <br />distinguish it from other corporations, special districts and <br /> <br />water <br /> <br />companies. <br /> <br />are <br /> <br />These <br /> <br />characteristics <br /> <br />conservancy <br /> <br />summarized as follows: <br /> <br />1., Although the water rights and main canals are <br />titled in the name of the Company, the right of use of <br />the canals and water is vested in the shareholders. <br />Jacobucci v. District Court, supra. <br /> <br />2. The water rights represented by shares of <br />stock are deemed personal property and transferrable as <br />provided by the Company's Bylaws. Section 7-42-105(4), <br />C.R.S. <br /> <br />3. The water right represented by a share of <br />stock is not inseparably allocated or "t,ied" to any <br />specific parcel of land, such as in the case of certain <br />irrigation districts and water conservancy districts, <br />and therefore can be transferred from parcel to parcel, <br />and diverted from headgate to headgate, at the <br />direction of the shareholder consistent with the <br />Company's Bylaws. <br /> <br />4. So long as no other shareholder is injured, <br />a shareholder potentially has the right to transfer <br />his water out of the main canal system operated by the <br />Company. Fort Lyons Can~ Co. v. Catlin Canal Co., <br />642 P. 2d 501 (Colo. 1982). <br /> <br />5. The Company possesses the power to condemn <br />real estate and rights-of-way for the purpose of <br />transacting the Company I s business, or for any lawful <br />purpose connected with the operations of the Company. <br />Section 38-2-101, C.R.S. <br /> <br />5 This means that a shareholder's water "\'QuId be diverted <br />from a natural stream at a location other than the main headgate <br />of the Company. See Wadsworth Ditch Co. v. Brown, 39 Colo. 57, <br />88 P. 1060 (1907).- <br /> <br />7 <br />