WSP01337

• File Number: 8051
• Description: Area of Origin
• Basin: Statewide
• Date: 10/1/1985
• Title: Addressing the Area of Origin Problem - A Research Report Prepared for the Colorado Water Resource Research Institute
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

DRAFT

impaired or increased in cost has generally been thought to mean

that a compensatory reservoir must be constructed on the West

Slope.67

3 .

Judicial Interpretation.

Reference has already been

made to the case of Metropolitan Suburban Water Users Association

v. Colorado River Water Conservation District68 in which the

Colorado Supreme Court concl uded unequ i vocably that wa ter may be

diverted and applied to a beneficial use anywhere in the state.69

The entities proposing diversions from the West Slope in that

case were all cities.

A major challenge to the constitutionality of the Colorado

area of origin protection statute was raised in Central Colorado

Water Conservancy District v. Colorado River Water Conservation

oistrict.70

There the conservancy district argued that the

67AS Beise notes, exportation. of water necessarily reduces
available supplies. "Therefore, a practical interpretation of
the Act is that a project proposing to divert water from the
Colorado River Basin must construct a compensatory reservoir
which will leave the West Slope in as good condition for present
and future development purposes as if the transporting project
had not been constructed and the river involved had remained
unregulated." Id. at 459. Beise goes on to point out the
substantial uncertainty involved in determining whether a
diversion projeci will increase the costs of future water uses on
the West Slope.

68supra note 54.

69It is not clear from the opinion what the legal basis was
for the argument that the City of Denver cannot engage in
transmountain diversions. Apparently, it was not based on an
argument that Denver should be covered by the Colorado statute
governing conservancy districts.

70186 Colo. 193, 526 P.2d 302 (1974).

29