Laserfiche WebLink
streamflows.- it just says the state. <br /> <br />Rep. Lamm: But on that last point and I <br />think it is really extremely important to say <br />that unlike the constitutional amendment that <br />was attempted to be initiated last year that <br />was passing around which would have given any <br />individual the right to appropriate water in <br />streams, that this bill only gives that right <br />to the State of Colorado. <br />Statements on House Floor, March 9, 1973, Second Reading of <br />S.B. 97 (emphasis added). Continued floor debate on March 13th <br />was to the same effect, with Representative Lamm specifically <br />stating that the Legislature's intent was to preserve the <br />doctrine of prior appropriation and limit the minimum stream flow <br />program to the State: <br />Rep Lamm: And in effect one of the things by <br />setting minimum stream flows will be an <br />attempt in effect to preserve the legal <br />existence that does not exist on any stream <br />today any place in Colorado. So by giving <br />the power to the State of Colorado. and only <br />the State of Colorado, to make additional <br />appropriations, in effect to not interfere <br />(with) the constitution--the Colorado <br />constitution stands guard against anybody <br />interfering with your water rights. <br />Statements on House Floor, March 13, 1973, Second Reading of <br />S.B. 97 (emphasis added). Finally, the debate on Third Reading <br />on April 2, 1973, returned again to this point: <br />Rep. Smith: Mr. Speaker, members of the <br />House, I think Rep. Sonnenberg is expressing <br />concern about something that just is not a <br />problem in the bill. On page 2, line 9-21 of <br />the bill, the only agency that is given <br />authority to acquire this water is the <br />Colorado Water conservation Board. <br />-10- <br />