7777

• UCREFRP Catalog Number: 7777
• Author: Ward, R. C.
• Title: Proceedings 1993 Colorado Water Convention, Front Range Water Alternatives and Transfer of Water from One Area of the State to Another, January 4-5, 1993, Denver, Colorado.
• USFW Year: 1993.
• USFW - Doc Type: \
• Copyright Material: NO

wisest way to proceed, it could be organized in several different
ways, but the support of Front Range communities, rural communities,
the environmental community, and other interests throughout the state
would be essential.

I think you all agree that the expense and frustration of doing
business as usual cannot continue. As you absorb the information
presented over the next two days, I ask you to consider whether it
would be helpful to establish a more active state role in moving
forward on these issues.

While several legislative and administrative options are
available to us, I am also quite aware that many Coloradans want a
smaller and less expensive government. I also know that we should not
and cannot force any resolution of these issues that does not work
reasonably well for all of us.

As I look at this audience, it is clear to me that you have
sufficient knowledge, wisdom and leadership to address these questions
and I am anxious to hear your views.

Thank you.

Written auestions and comments for Governor Romer

1. Given that agriculture uses the vast majority of the state's water
(and pesticides), isn't there a conflict between agricultural use of
water and the state's environmental and tourism interests?

2. The state often speaks with multiple voices on water transfers and
water development. Why cannot the st~te (and especially the Dept. of
Natural Resources divisions) resolve internally its conflicts and then
speak with a single voice? That alone would smooth the water planning
and development process. (P.S. -- Ideally the U.S. should do
likewise. )

3. Why hasn't the state taken a leadership role in planning for the
interbasin allocation of water in Colorado?
a. No authority
b. Low priority
c. Both of the above
d. Something else?

4. What is the state doing now to help Front Range communities obtain
dependable water supplies?

5. How can we move to a "new direction" without putting current water
rights investments at risk?

6. "Cooperation" among water providers might be seen as an agreement
in restraint of trade. One way the State could help water planning
would be to express a "clearly articulated State policy to replace
competition with regulation or monopoly public service" in the
acquisition of water rights and provision of water service. This
would bring such cooperative agreements within the Parker or state
action exception to antitrust liability.

8