4202 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

which can be protected only as junior rights; economics; conser- vation; local land use planning; and the needs of federal lands. Under Colorado law, all of those things are linear and parallel to each other. As Aldo Leopold would put it, water policy ought to be a plane that cuts across those things. Second, Colorado ought to exact a charge for the use of water, just as governments routinely do when other natural resources are used for consumptive purposes. The charge, which should be levied on every acre-foot diverted, ought to be modest but should be gradually increased. The use of a pricing mecha- nism such as this would be a powerful tool for conservation. The old, established uses have few present economic incentives to conserve water. Third, Colorado ought to adopt a broad-based charter to require water efficiency. Beneficial use ought to be defined by drainage and subdrainage through rule-making. The State Engineer's Office then ought to enforce phased-in, true benefi- cial use standards and in so doing would make an important step toward becoming a water manager in the modern sense of the phrase. Colorado law already requires the optimum use of water, prohibits the waste of water, and makes waste a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not less than $100. C.R.S. § 37-92-501(2)(e), §§ 37-84-107--109. The Colorado Supreme Court has made it clear that beneficial use does not include waste, even if an old decree may allow a particular amount of water to be diverted: "There is read into every decree awarding priori- -14-