WSP03920 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . t 0027 -44- :::::.~ These enumerated reserved water rights uses for national parks arc largely consIstent with the Master-Referee and Colorado district court's decree In the Colorado 4, 5, and 6 litigation. suora.88/ My conclusions on national park reserved waTer rights are also consistent with the Supreme Coud's holding In New Mexico. suora. As recognized In that decIsIon. any doubt about the breadth of park system purposes and the concomitant reserved water rights. Is resolved by comparing the narrower uti Iltarlan purposes for which national forests were reserved under the 1897 Act. United States v. New Mexico, suora. at 709-1 I. The con- sistency of my conclusions on national p~eserved water rights with New Mexico can also been seen from the post-New Mexico Colorado.dlstrlct court opinion In Colorado 4. 5. and 6 (Judge-SteY/art. Oct. 2, 1978). which did not substantially alter national park reserved water rights In light of New Mexico. The above-defined reserved water rights uses are all Intimately re- lated to the fundamental purpose for park reservations. as articulated In 16 U.S.C, ~ I. Thus, I conclude that the above-defined water uses for parks fal I within the fundamental purpose for park reservations, and accordingly receive reserved water rights under the reserved water rights doctrine as recently reiterated In the New Mexico decision. 88/ The Colorado 4. 5, and 6 decree found fourteen types of water uses to be within the reserved water rights emblt of 16 U.S.C. ~ I. The decree Is consistent with my conclusions In al I but the fol lowing two respect s. ~~;.~ ~ First, the Master-Referee concluded that only concession uses operated by the United States receive reserved water rights. In my view, the 1916 Organic Act clearly envisioned permit and lease concession agree~ ments to provide for accommodation of visitors in parks. Moreover. sub- sequent congressional action has reenforced the concept that the con- cession system Is the preferred means for providing facilities for public enjoyment of the parks. In furtherance of the fundamenta I purpose of 16 U.S.C. ~ I. See 16 U.S.C, H20, 20a (1970), Since providing for sustained publlc-enjoyment Is. one of the fundamental purposes for park reservations under II; U.S,C. ~ I, and the concession system Is the congressionally-favored method for effecting that fundamental purpose, I conclude that concession uses obtain reserved water rights. Second. though the Master-Referee appeared to acknowledge reserved water rights for necessary stream flews to permit public water-borne enjoyment and recreation In parks. the Colorado district court held that recreational boating was not a fundamenTal purpose for park reservations under 16 U.S.C, ~ I. In the Matter of the Aoollcatlon for Water Rlqh~.s of the United States of America. Water Divisions 4, 5, and 6, 2-6 (Opinion of Coloraao Water Judge Stewart. OCT. 2, 1978). This holding [footnote continued] :::'-=- :~