Colorado and the West is running out of water . . . (Denver: litigation, legal)

[Josseppie]

I am not a expert but the reports I see don't indicate that is a problem. There are water compacts that are in place that would have to be re opened for anything like that to happen and when that was even mentioned as a possibility by Senator McCaine when he was running for President the back lash he got from both parties was enough to make him "clarify" what he meant. In fact the Denver Post said "in Colorado we don't vote for water rustlers, we tar and feather them".

So I don't expect you will see the federal government taking Pueblo's water anytime soon. In fact Pueblo keeps on buying more water with out any problem from the feds, as it is our right to buy as much water as we want.

[MtnFlyer]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

as it is our right to buy as much water as we want.

Just for clarification Josseppie, I completely agree and I wasn't suggesting by any means that Pueblo should be required to "share" if they had the business sense to plan ahead. Of course I also have no problem with a businessman rolling the dice and spending his own money to truck bottled water into a disaster zone and charge market price to compensate him for the risk he took with his investment capital. There are those who would cry "price gouging" on the businessman however. By the same token I could see if there really were a dry up of the water in the west, there would be a sizeable quotient of the population who would cry, "no fare" they have to share with the rest of us.

[Josseppie]

If that happens I would be more then happy to sale them a glass of water, perhaps two if I am feeling generous.



"Whisky is for drinking; water is for fighting"

[CometVoyager]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

I am not a expert but the reports I see don't indicate that is a problem. There are water compacts that are in place that would have to be re opened for anything like that to happen and when that was even mentioned as a possibility by Senator McCaine when he was running for President the back lash he got from both parties was enough to make him "clarify" what he meant. In fact the Denver Post said "in Colorado we don't vote for water rustlers, we tar and feather them".

So I don't expect you will see the federal government taking Pueblo's water anytime soon. In fact Pueblo keeps on buying more water with out any problem from the feds, as it is our right to buy as much water as we want.

Hi Josseppie & MtnFlyer! Hope your weekend looks good!
If I may add my 2 cents, but way back when I was in school I did take several water rights classes and do remember several specific aspects of the law. Now this all could have changed, as I have been retired from the business for 10 years!

Water rights for States, Counties, municipalities, townships (and this even does apply to land owners) usually follow three basic principals. Spare me on the international applications. The first being "riparian, these rights are acquired with title to land bordering or overlying the source, then there is appropriative, which basically means what ever a Judge will rule on and prescriptive, rights that are acquired by physical diversion according to legislative statute. Now, when it comes to by passing state law believe it or not the Feds have more power to do that than if they wanted to take out an Indian Nation's Gambling Casino's water supp;y! Indian Nations have in many cases Iron Clad water and fishing rights! Which in my opinion is so arcane and ridiculous!

So this is a dynamic process which today is unfortunately driven by politics rather than good science!

[Josseppie]

I agree it is complicated and completely political. Not sure if I understand what you said right but I think you left out a important part and that has to do with seniority of the rights. Pueblo can have the same amount of water as say a farm but if the farm has higher seniority then Pueblo they can ask for their water before Pueblo can and visa versa. I think that can be sold however, and that is why pueblo is so exited about the Bessemer ditch, it has very senior rights and each share is more productive then shares in other sources.


As far as my weekend, thank you! I hope you's looks good too..

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by CometVoyager

Hi Josseppie & MtnFlyer! Hope your weekend looks good!
If I may add my 2 cents, but way back when I was in school I did take several water rights classes and do remember several specific aspects of the law. Now this all could have changed, as I have been retired from the business for 10 years!

Water rights for States, Counties, municipalities, townships (and this even does apply to land owners) usually follow three basic principals. Spare me on the international applications. The first being "riparian, these rights are acquired with title to land bordering or overlying the source, then there is appropriative, which basically means what ever a Judge will rule on and prescriptive, rights that are acquired by physical diversion according to legislative statute. Now, when it comes to by passing state law believe it or not the Feds have more power to do that than if they wanted to take out an Indian Nation's Gambling Casino's water supp;y! Indian Nations have in many cases Iron Clad water and fishing rights! Which in my opinion is so arcane and ridiculous!

So this is a dynamic process which today is unfortunately driven by politics rather than good science!

Instead of general information, why don't you read Colorado-specific information like this?:

Western States Water Laws - Colorado

Colo. Division of Water Resources

If you want to actually get informed on these issues, you should check into this:

Water Workshop

Oh, by the way, I took my most recent Colorado water law class just a couple of years ago . . . and deal with Colorado water right issues in my work on an almost daily basis . . .

[CometVoyager]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

I agree it is complicated and completely political. Not sure if I understand what you said right but I think you left out a important part and that has to do with seniority of the rights. Pueblo can have the same amount of water as say a farm but if the farm has higher seniority then Pueblo they can ask for their water before Pueblo can and visa versa. I think that can be sold however, and that is why pueblo is so exited about the Bessemer ditch, it has very senior rights and each share is more productive then shares in other sources.


As far as my weekend, thank you! I hope you's looks good too..

Hi Josseppie,

Specifically for Pueblo I am not up on the historical legal transactions, but I do know that domestic use will most of the time trump agricultural and industrial. As for whether Pueblo has in place any particular standing contract or prior appropriations you would have to go down to the county recorders office to get that information.

But that may be a moot point, as you guys have such vast resources and the only possible encumbrance would be some prior authorization agreements with regards to your aquifers!

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by CometVoyager

Hi Josseppie,

Specifically for Pueblo I am not up on the historical legal transactions, but I do know that domestic use will most of the time trump agricultural and industrial. As for whether Pueblo has in place any particular standing contract or prior appropriations you would have to go down to the county recorders office to get that information.

But that may be a moot point, as you guys have such vast resources and the only possible encumbrance would be some prior authorization agreements with regards to your aquifers!

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Seniority--first in use, first in right governs. In fact, in order to convert agricultural water rights to municipal use, a complicated process of getting an augmentation plan must be approved. That is why potential municipal purchasers of water rights generally try to acquire the most senior water rights available. The same goes if they are trying to get a point of diversion. As for water rights information, most of that is held by the State Engineer's office and the Colorado Water Courts http://www.courts.state.co.us/Courts/Water/Index.cfm

This is a very useful summary: http://www.westernwaterlaw.com/artic...WaterLaw_2.pdf

[CometVoyager]

Originally Posted by Josseppie

I agree it is complicated and completely political. Not sure if I understand what you said right but I think you left out a important part and that has to do with seniority of the rights. Pueblo can have the same amount of water as say a farm but if the farm has higher seniority then Pueblo they can ask for their water before Pueblo can and visa versa. I think that can be sold however, and that is why pueblo is so exited about the Bessemer ditch, it has very senior rights and each share is more productive then shares in other sources.
As far as my weekend, thank you! I hope you's looks good too..

Most of the stuff we find on the internet is bogus and maybe 20% has some actual truth behind it. Personally, that is why I am totally against having broad band in elementary & secondary schools. Library science is a crucial issue for our young people and unfortunately it is no longer being taught in the schools because of the lazy reliance on the internet!

So beware when some may post links on here, as the internet is the Mother of All Wikipedias! Constantly being edited and changed! The only internet I like to reference is secure paid sites.

[jazzlover]

Originally Posted by CometVoyager

Most of the stuff we find on the internet is bogus and maybe 20% has some actual truth behind it. Personally, that is why I am totally against having broad band in elementary & secondary schools. Library science is a crucial issue for our young people and unfortunately it is no longer being taught in the schools because of the lazy reliance on the internet!

So beware when some may post links on here, as the internet is the Mother of All Wikipedias! Constantly being edited and changed! The only internet I like to reference is secure paid sites.

So, information from the state agencies charged with administering the water laws of the State of Colorado are "bogus?" Oh, and the information sheet at the bottom of my post is from the Holland & Hart Law Firm. If you knew ANYTHING about Colorado water law, you would know that Holland & Hart is one of the top 3 law firms in Colorado--with very well-respected expertise in water law matters. I am personally acquainted with several of their lawyers. The link to the Colorado Water Congress--I know both of the founding members of it--one being one of the most respected water lawyers in the state.