My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP11250
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
11000-11999
>
WSP11250
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 3:16:42 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 4:50:44 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.140.20
Description
Colorado River Basin Organizations and Entities - Colorado River Basin States Forum - California
State
CA
Basin
Western Slope
Date
1/1/1979
Author
Myron B Holburt
Title
Appendix to Annual Report of the Colorado River Board of California for the Calendar Year 1978
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />1', "", -1 ,-, <br />.J.'i~ <br /> <br />5. Concerning grants under Section 20S of the Clean Water Act, <br />that EPA 20S planning grants include funding for designated planning <br />agency grants, which will be transmitted from the State to the desig- <br />nated planning agencies in accordance with the Statc/ Federal agreement, <br />and that the States be allowed to use local planning entities to the <br />extent indicated in the State/Federal agreement for accomplishing the <br />priority planning projects of the state. <br /> <br />The Council also adopted a paper entitled "Position on the Admin- <br />istration' s \'later Policy Reforms tI. The items covered in the paper that <br />are of interest to the Board are as follows: <br /> <br />a. Federal involvement in traditional state responsibilities <br />is not in the national interest, <br /> <br />b. National water policy must respect rights established and <br />recognized by interstate compacts, <br /> <br />c. The states object to precluding state court adjudication of <br />Indian water rights. The President's announced policy of adjudicating <br />Indian rights exclusively in federal courts is clearly inconsistent <br />with Congressional policy as established in the McCarran Act, and as <br />interpreted by the Supreme Court in Akin, <br /> <br />d. The Administration should recognize primacy of the states' <br />role in the allocation of water resources, <br /> <br />e. Water conservation measures should be applied on a site- <br />specific basis. Blanket national requirements and federal performance <br />standards, which ignore physical and hydrological conditions that differ <br />from area to area, are undesirable, <br /> <br />f. Imposition of water conservation requirements as a condition <br />to federal financial aid is an inappropriate use of federal power, <br /> <br />g. While funds to assist the states in their conservation efforts <br />would be helpful, the states are concerned that conditions imposed on <br />the use of these funds will threaten the states' prerogatives in <br />managing their water resources, and <br /> <br />h. The President's recommendations concerning protection of <br />groundwater supplies and maintenance of instream flows are based on <br />assumptions which do not generally apply in the western states. <br /> <br />Pacific Southwest Inter-Agency <br />Committee (PSIAC) <br /> <br />The PSIAC is comprised of representatives from the seven Colorado <br />River Basin states, plus Oregon and Idaho, and the federal departments <br />with land, energy, and water responsibilities. <br /> <br />The draft survey report on vegetative management to increase water <br />yield in the Colorado River Basin that was prepared by the U.S. Forest <br />Service was nearing the finalization stage after receiving the comments <br /> <br />- 15 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.