My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
8013
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
8013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 5:02:32 PM
Creation date
5/20/2009 9:59:25 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
UCREFRP Catalog Number
8013
Author
Pontius, D. and I. SWCA.
Title
Colorado River Basin Study.
USFW Year
1997.
USFW - Doc Type
Tucson, Arizona.
Copyright Material
NO
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
173
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 />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />The Western Water Policy Review Advisory Commission (Commission) <br />requested that this study include background information on the Colorado <br />River and its geology, geography, and hydrology; a description and analysis <br />of the most critical issues facing the basin in the near future and efforts <br />being made to address these problems; and also provide specific recom- <br />mendations to the Commission including the proper role for the federal <br />government in basin water management and governance over the next <br />twenty years. The opinions expressed in the recommendations are my own <br />and reflect, of course, my own view of the history, law and politics of the <br />Colorado River Basin and the current issues. I did my best to provide an <br />objective discussion of the issues and to recommend changes needed to <br />improve water management in the basin in the 21st century. <br /> <br />In addition, the report was to include a case study of a specific watershed <br />and a discussion of how water management problems are and can be dealt <br />with at the watershed level. The Dolores River Watershed, located in <br />southwestern Colorado, was chosen for this case study. <br /> <br />I would like to acknowledge the able assistance of David Gold, John Thomas, <br />Peter Livingston, and Dorothy House of SWCA, Inc., all of whom contributed <br />to the development of the draft report, along with Mary Wallace, a senior <br />research specialist with the Water Resources Research Center in Tucson, <br />Arizona, who contributed research and writing on a number of issues. I am <br />especially grateful to the extraordinary work done by David Gold to produce <br />this report; his research, editing and production of the graphics included <br />were invaluable and the task would have been impossible to accomplish <br />without him. I would also like to thank Frank Gregg, Helen Ingram, Gary <br />Hansen, and Steve Carothers, who served as an informal advisory <br />committee, for their comments and advice on the study. <br /> <br />In finalizing the report, I have reviewed and analyzed well over 800 specific <br />suggestions for changes and comments, both pro and con, that were sent to <br />the Commission by over 40 entities and individuals before the comment <br />deadline. In the vast majority of cases, the comments were constructive, <br />corrected factual or technical points, or helped clarify the discussion and <br />were incorporated in the final report. In some cases, commenters simply <br />disagreed with the text, my emphasis, analysis, or the recommendations. I <br />want to thank all those who took the time to comment on the draft and hope <br />they will again take the time to read the final report, which has been <br />improved in my mind considerably as a result of their comments. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.