My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12574
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
1-1000
>
WSP12574
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 8:50:06 PM
Creation date
8/1/2007 8:43:48 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8059
Description
Section D General Statewide Issues - State Water Plan
State
CO
Date
9/6/1989
Author
David W Walker
Title
A Colorado State Water Plan-Do We Have One - David W Walker - CWCB - 09-06-89
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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 />001348 <br /> <br />projects it wanted built, two by the CorpR of EngineerR. and <br /> <br />seven by the Bureau of Reclamation. That approach would last <br /> <br />for at least three decades and iR not overlooked today. <br /> <br />The 1970s were a pivotal decade. The insights of Monte <br /> <br />Pascoe. former director of the Colorado Department of Natural <br /> <br />Resources and former chairman of the Denver Water Department. <br /> <br />are especially cogent. With respect to the federal Water <br /> <br />Resources Planning Act of 1965. he observes: <br /> <br />Translated. in hindsight. the passage <br />of this Act signaled that the Congress was <br />running out of money and patience for <br />federally funded water resource projects and <br />was beginning to feel pressure from the <br />embryonic environmental movement. Congress <br />needed a pause and the best way for bringing <br />this about was to proceed with studieR that <br />involved all the entitieR involved in the <br />development of water resources. These <br />studies produced a new restraint--delays. <br /> <br />He comments then on the effects of the passage of the <br /> <br />National Environmental Policy Act in 1970. the Water Pollution <br /> <br />Contrnl Act Amendments of 1972. the Endangered Species Act of <br /> <br />1973. and finally the "Hit List" of President Carter in 1977: <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Thus. not only had the greatest source <br />of funds for water development--the federal <br />government--dried up. but new regulatory <br />restraints on traditional water development <br />had been imposed. The bulldozer was too <br />big; man was no longer struggling to stay <br />even with nature. He was overwhelming it. <br />Our water: was too dirty. our air. too <br />polluted. our natural and beloved scenic <br />wonderR and places for rAcrAation were in <br />danger. These changes did not. and could <br />not. escape our: state pOlicy makArR. <br /> <br />-2- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.