My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7777
CWCB
>
UCREFRP
>
Public
>
7777
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/11/2009 11:32:56 AM
Creation date
8/10/2009 4:01:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
UCREFRP
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
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
186
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />18. The Denver Metropolitan Water Development Agreement between Denver <br />and 46 other providers was a landmark agreement in 1982. Some 10 <br />years later, after the demise of Two Forks, the fate of that agreement <br />is moot. How could water providers count on anything that says: "Big <br />brother would protect you" -- when the first obstacle occurs, big <br />brother runs. <br /> <br />19. What kind of constructive precautions is the state ~plementing to <br />guarantee that we will never again throw $100M down a black hole for <br />water planning studies? <br /> <br />20. Is it feasible to develop a statewide water project given the <br />differing and competing interests (and tax bases) of various political <br />subdivisions? <br /> <br />21. What role will any state agency play to develop Colorado's compact <br />entitlements? (The agencies, including CWCB, have generally opposed <br />all attempts to initiate new water rights to consumptively use water <br />in the Colorado River Basin.) <br /> <br />22. How do you accommodate "dry year leasing" or "municipal drought <br />protection through periodic dry-up" if the water is not in storage <br />from prior wet years and infrastructure is not in place to deliver <br />that water? <br /> <br />23. Isn't it more productive for the state to spend its time <br />developing a "state Water Plan" rather than interfere with years of <br />planning entities have done to date? <br /> <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.