Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />":'l <br /> <br />~ <br />.::. <br />Con <br />:> <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />., <br />.- <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />~--F1xst:--ThE.t-tne.Bt;ipuli,fion was binding upon ColorCldo and its water <br />users; <br /> <br />Second: Thc.t the provisions of' t!le Stipulation bectime ef'fective upon <br />the storage of water in Caddon Reservoir; <br /> <br />Third: That the administration of the Stipulation ~ecame effective <br />April lRt, 1943, the beginning of the irrigation perio~ mentioned in the <br />Stipul,'.tion; <br /> <br />Fourth: <br />acre feet of <br />below Caddoa <br />period; <br /> <br />That Colorado ToRS obliged to deliver to KanRBS up to 52,000 <br />water between April lRt and October 1st if Colorado ditches <br />Reservoir received up to 117,900 acre feet during the same <br /> <br />Fifth: That the water in stornee in Caddoa Reservoir on April 1st <br />should be considered as temporarily re~~ated stream flow and not as <br />"Surplus'" _ter as defined by the Stipulution; <br /> <br />Sixth: Thct in order to meet required deliveries of ~ater to Kansas <br />at times when there ~s no ~ter in storage in Caddoa Reservoir, the State <br />Engineer of Colorado ~ms obliged to restrict diversions by Color&do ditches. <br />in accordance with their decreed dates of priority, regardless of t~eir <br />locution. <br /> <br />The Attorney General rendered an opinion on May 5rd, in wr~ch he con- <br />curred with the vie"s of the State Engineer. <br /> <br />Other points u~on which there .was a divergency of opinion were: <br /> <br />1. Contentions by certain water users below the reservoir, thEt the <br />ditches above the reservoir had no just clai<D to any of the water in stor- <br />age on bpril 1st, amounting to about 48,000 acre feet, since all thE.t <br />~ter had been accumulated at times Tohen no restrictions had been olaced <br />upon diversions by ditches above the reservoir. . <br /> <br />2. Contentions by ditches above the reservoir that very little of the <br />water stored up to April 1st, would have been used by ditches below the <br />reservoir during tne particular storage period, and hence the ditches below <br />the reservoir had no material claim to the .water which had been stored, un- <br />less the water users above the reserv~ir were relieved of any obligation to <br />deliver water to Kansas. <br /> <br />5. The view of Water users sbove the reservoir that they were not <br />obligated to deliver water for use in Kansas after the reservoir had been <br />emptied. <br /> <br />4. Or th~t the provicions of tne Stipulation in any way affected the <br />rights of the upstream ditches to divert at <L~y and all times in accordance <br />