Laserfiche WebLink
<br />f10Z"I"'~ <br />U (:J'.r., <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Law Section. The Colorado Water Congress formed a special commit- <br /> <br />tee consisting of water users. Each of these committees has been <br /> <br />furnished copies of the code and have been meeting, and formulat- <br /> <br />ing suggestions and criticisms. <br /> <br />To our amazement, the feature which has been received most <br /> <br />unfavorably has been the advisory board to the division engineer. <br /> <br />It has been criticized as an administrative monstrosity and a <br /> <br />proliferation of boards when boards should be eliminated. <br /> <br />The committee has been accused of "backing away" from the <br /> <br />ground water problem, when that was the one thing we thought we <br /> <br />had been progressive and courageous about. <br /> <br />The committees examining the draft have, themselves, been at <br /> <br />times more venturesome than the drafting committee. Although the <br /> <br />drafting committee considered merging the Ground Water Commission, <br /> <br />the Water Conservation Board and the state Engineer's office, we <br /> <br />discarded the idea as being too radical, only to find that, at <br /> <br />least preliminarily, the consulting committees lean that way. <br /> <br />In any event, the reactions have been interesting, and I am <br /> <br />sure that when they complete their work, the drafting committee <br /> <br />will have a wealth of suggestions upon which to start deliberations <br /> <br />anew. It may very well be that the suggestions will be too diverse <br /> <br />for reconciliation, but I have worked with this committee now for <br /> <br />over a year and I know that it is an energetic committee devoted <br /> <br />11 <br />