OCR Text |
Show Chapter 6. COLORADO CONTENTS Page 1. Development of Colorado Water Law__________________________ 155 2. State Organizational Structure for Water Administration and Control. 156 2.1 Administration of Water Rights_______________________ 156 2.2 Resolution of Water Use Conflicts_____________________ 159 2.3 Other Agencies Having Water Resource Responsibilities____ 161 3. Surface Waters____________________________________________ 163 3.1 Method of Acquiring Rights__________________________ 163 3.2 Nature and Limit of Rights__________________________ 165 3.3 Changes, Sales, and Transfers_________________________ 167 3.4 Loss of Rights_____________________________________ 168 3.5 Storage Waters, Artificial Lakes, and Ponds_____________ 169 3.6 Springs__________________________________________ 169 3.7 Diffused Surface Waters_____________________________ 169 4. Ground Water____________________________________________ 169 Publications Available________________________________________ 172 DISCUSSION 1. Development of Colorado Water Law Colorado has always been an "appropriation" doctrine State. It has long been established that the common law or riparian rights doctrine never was the law of Colorado, even before statehood. As was said in a famous, early case: Imperative necessity, unknown to the countries which gave It birth, compels the recognition of another doctrine in conflict [with the riparian doctrine]. The climate is dry, and the soil, when moistened only by the usual rainfall, is arid and unproductive; except in a few favored sections, artificial irrigation for agriculture is an absolute necessity. Water in the various streams thus acquires a value unknown in moister climates. Instead of being a mere incident to the soil, it arises, when appropriated, to dignity of a distinct usufructuary estate, or right of property.1 Since Colorado was the first State to adopt a pure appropriation system, abrogating the riparian rights theory in toto, the doctrine early became known as the Colorado doctrine, as distinguished from the California doctrine which attempted to recognize both riparian- ism and appropriation. The State constitution declares that the unappropriated water of every natural stream is the property of the public, subject to appro- priation, and that the ri^ht to divert unappropriated waters of any natural stream to beneficial uses shall never be denied.2 The consti- tution also provides that as between those using water for the same purpose, priority of appropriation shall give the better right.3 These 1 Ooffin v. Left Hand Ditch Co., 6 Colo. 443 (1882). 2 Colo. Const., art XVII, sec. 5 and 6. 8 Colo. Const., art. XVI, sec. 6. 155 |