7940 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The Development of Water Policy- in Colorado James S. Lochhead here are two viewpoints generally expressed in Colorado concern- . ~ ing statewide water resource planning. Some suggest the state has no "water plan," and that a plan is needed to direct water development in a more efficient, logical, and environmentally sensitive manner. Others assert this state does have a water flan -the doctrine of prior appropriation. Bothpositions are inaccurate. In fact, Colorado has existing and evolving water policies, and an institutional framework for establishing such policies that goes far beyond the individual right of appropriation. Water use and development in this state is very directly influenced by public policies, which .are generated through legislative, executive and judicial processes. The legislature has created water policy agencies; and promulgates direct water policy. Executive agencies implement legislative directive, are used by the legislature as resources, and develop their own policies ,.:and rules within their authority. The judiciary has developed case law -and interpreted statutory law in a manner that reflects the evolution of ;~ ,.,public policy. Although the system can be improved, it remains flexible enough to accommodate change without the complete overhaul that some interests suggest iS necessary.. Certainly, the Colorado system is much rriore fhxible and accountable than would be a super water agency purporting. to act in the public interest, or a single water plan which '.'would dictate development. _ _ ., Moreover, the Colorado. water policy framework is adapted to the variety of conditions and problems that exist in this state. The state has varying conditions of over-use, abundant supply, economic conditions and interstate relationships. To dictate a water plan through a single document or agency would ignore Colorado's geographic, hydrologic,. economical, social and environmental diversity. Simply stated, what is appropriate and efficient"in one area may not be so in another. Therefore, Colorado has developed a layering of local, regional and state agencies adapted to these divergent conditions. In discussing Colorado's water policy, and whether this state needs a "state water plan," it is important to remain cognizant of the basic constitutional foundation of the prior appropriation doctrine_ That form- dation is the right of the individual -areal property right - to put water to beneficial use. The system is decentralized. There is no single agency or official overseeing water use and development on a statewide basis. Although the right to appropriate water is subject to some regula- '= ~ tion, the state cannot dictate to the individual whether, or how, or when, or where water will be used. If an appropriator has the financial ability to develop a project, he is essentially free to do so. As long as water is t being used in priority and in a reasonably efficient manner, the state has no direct authority. Therefore, basic decisions as to the allocation and use of water resources must be made by individual appropriators, not Continued on page 2 ~'""' . ' \ , ~' ; _t ~~ i" ~ \ ~~. ~„~,-AM -~, ,. `ate _ f F .. ! ,: _~..Q .{ ~• ~ to assist in or contribute to the protection; conservation and development of water in the state of Colorado °~L, i _-~. ~ .,.~..~:, -~. r,:~,;;,:" _ ,_.-..-,¢; .. ...,. ._ .._. - ...:fir ~"` _- Published b Co j rya. ~at~r L'czrt - res5 . ~ .. r T . ' ' V1j1NTER 1988 .~ Y _ .~ ~ ~< - ~ OL. 7, PwO. 1 _:~" _ ~, ~ ~ ecies Protection and Water Develo merit Endangered Sp p in the Upper Colorado River Basin -:.The Colorado .Water ~'ongress Special Project ~~ -- -- --~ - ` on Threatened and Endangered Species _ h~ Tom Pitts, P.E., Project Coordinator ~ ' ' xk- _ t' w=° - n December, 1983, the Colorado Water Congress Board of the interior and governors of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah - - of Directors established the Colorado Water Congress Spe- on January 21, 1988. The Board of Directors of the Colorado ,~:~~ cial Project on Threatened and Endangered Species. The Water Congress has passed a resolution endorsing this program. .goal of the Special Project is to find an administrative solution The agreed-upon program, titled "Recovery Implementation ~~` ~.,~ acceptable to water interests, the Federal government, the states, Program for Endangered Fish Species in the Upper Colorado °""~"~ b and environmental organizations which would allow continued River Basin," provides for protection of endangered native fish. '" "` '' water development and avoid conflicts with the Federal En- species in the Upper Colorado River Basin, and calls for their dangered Species Act in- the Upper Colorado River Basin and recovery and delisting as endangered species within afifteen- ~ ~ _ ~~ Platte River Basin. That goal has been achieved in the Upper year timeframe. The Recovery Program also provides a means. ~ ,. ,, Colorado River Basin. On October 29, 1987, representatives of protecting endangered species habitat within the framework of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Bureau of Reclamation, of State water law while water development proceeds in the -~ ~: _ _ States of Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah jointly signed an en- Upper Basin. In addition, a broad range of activities will be ': dorsement of a program which will resolve the conflict between pursued to assure achievement of the recovery goal within fif- ~ ,.' ,~ endangered species protection and water development in the teen years. ,~ ~~~ Upper Colorado River Basin. A Cooperative Agreement imple- Development of the Recovery Program represents an out- '~~:- :_ meriting this program is scheduled for signing by the Secretary Continued on page 4 ~~~ 30th Rnnual C~~MC~ Convention