7999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

U in 1997, there remains time to agree upon a strategy that would not offend participants in either of the basin recovery programs. There was unanimous agreement of this being the proper time to begin each basin supporting the other basin's recovery and conservation plans. The Council has always worked for integration of the upper and lower basin into an overall management system and the Council should begin written and verbal support among the other participants in each basin. Now is the time to exchange support of programs to get the total job done to the greatest benefit of the entire basin. Support for upper basin legislation couched in terms of this being the first of two separate but comparable recovery plans which need funding was discussed as the most appropriate vehicle for active prosecuting of all agencies and groups involved in support. At the conclusion of the discussion, a motion was made by Arizona, seconded by Colorado, that Janisch and Kochman ' provide a draft in support of the legislation for funding of the recovery plan in the upper basin, couched in terms of the two recovery programs necessarily working together and ' one being slightly ahead of the other; that the directors of Colorado and Arizona look at this draft in review of the discussion held by the Council, and following their comments, provide a second draft to Chairman Molini who will distribute this draft to the other directors of the Council for their comments. Following redrafting based on these comments submit the letter of support in behalf of the L Council. This may take some time and the legislation strategy apparently allowing for that time, that a particular date for the letter to be distributed not be set at this time. The motion was approved unanimously. There being no further business to be brought before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 3:10 p.m., April 24, 1996. 23