Background
The following was summarized from http://www.westernwaterlaw.com/ABAarticle.htm
The idea behind the RICD is that a defined amount of water is contained and directed within the river for the purpose of recreation. Over the years recreation has been defined primarily as boating. The RICD rules were called for in legislation, commonly referred to as "Senate Bill 216," and passed by the Colorado General Assembly in 2001. Senate Bill 216 recognized in-channel water right principles announced by the Colorado Supreme Court in a decision involving an in-channel water right in a section of the Cache La Poudre River. See City of Thornton v. City of Fort Collins, 830 P.2d 915 (Colo. 1992).
In Colorado, the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) is vested by statute "with the exclusive authority . . . to appropriate . . . such waters of natural streams and lakes as the board determines may be required for minimum stream flows . . . to preserve the natural environment to a reasonable degree." Colo. Rev. Stat. § 37-92-102(3) (2001). In practice, the CWCB exercises this authority only in circumstances where a natural "environment can exist without material injury to water rights." Rules Concerning the Colorado Instream Flow and Natural Lake Level Program, 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 408-2, at 6.22.
the CWCB's submits findings and recommendations to the Water Court based on statutory factors, including the following:
1. whether the requested RICD water right would impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and place to "consumptive beneficial use its compact entitlements;"
2. the appropriate stream reach required for the intended use;
3. whether access exists for recreational in-channel use;
4. whether exercise of the RICD would materially injure an in-stream flow appropriation by the CWCB; and
5. whether the RICD would promote maximum utilization of waters of the state.
The RICD rules identify more than twenty specific, additional issues or matters that the CWCB may consider in making findings under the statutory factors. For example, in evaluating whether a requested RICD might impair Colorado's ability to beneficially use its compact entitlements, the rules provide that the CWCB may consider "the proximity of the RICD to suitable upstream points of diversion or storage which may be utilized by those who would place the water to consumptive beneficial use." 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 408-3, at 7.a. Similarly focusing on potential traditional water uses that could occur in the future, the rules provide that in evaluating "maximum utilization" under the statute, the CWCB may consider "whether there are any probable future changes, transfers, or exchanges of water rights from points of diversion downstream of the reach affected by the RICD to points upstream of or in the reach affected by the RICD." 2 Colo. Code Regs. § 408-3, at 7.e.