My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP04523
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
4001-5000
>
WSP04523
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:55:51 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:24:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8103.400
Description
Arkansas River Basin Legislation - Compacts
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
6/18/1984
Author
Unknown
Title
By-Laws of the Arkansas River Compact Administration - Appendix C
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
192
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />(}01620 <br /> <br />II. Interstate History <br /> <br />A Early Suits <br /> <br />1. Kansas v. Colorado. 206 U.S. 46 (1907). <br />a. Filed by Kansas 1901 alleging Colorado had reduced natural flow by <br />appropriations for irrigation. <br />b. Colorado asserted it had no obligation to pass any flow to Kansas. <br />c. Court held <br />1) basis of resolution is an equitable apportionment of benefit with each state <br />having reciprocal rights and obligations. <br />2) moving state (Kansas) had burden to show "not merely some technical right <br />but one which carried corresponding benefits," <br />3) Kansas failed in showing material injury despite fact Colorado had obviously <br />depleted flows in process of irrigating many acres. <br />4) If Colorado depletions continued to increase Kansas was entitled to renew <br />claims and prove that there was no longer an equitable distribution of <br />benefits between the .state. <br /> <br />2. U.S. Irrigating Co. (Kansas) v. Graham Ditch Co.. et. a!., 1910 suit, U.S. District <br />Court, Colorado. Seeks adjudication of relative priorities between Kansas and <br />Colorado ditches. <br />a. settled by contract dated February 19, 1916 <br />b. Colorado ditches recognized Kansas ditch priorities of August 22, 1910 and paid <br />damages and costs to Kansas parties. <br /> <br />3. Finney County. Water Users Association v. Graham Ditch Co.. et.al., 1916 suit, <br />U.S. District Court Colorado seeking similar relief. <br /> <br />4. Finney County W.U.A. also sued other Colorado ditches. (1923) in U.S. District <br />Court, Colorado seeking similar relief. <br /> <br />B. Colorado v. Kansas. 320 U.S. 383 (1943) <br /> <br />1. Colorado brings original action in 1928 to enjoin Kansas ditches from repeatedly <br />litigating priorities amongst ditches and requests rights reorganized in 1907 decree <br />be protected. <br /> <br />2. Kansas claims Colorado has greatly increased depletions and threatens to continue <br />increasing, requests a cfs allocation from river senior to Colorado use. <br /> <br />3. Special Master appointed <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.