My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 9:03:32 AM
Creation date
6/2/2010 11:38:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
SB01-216
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
1/1/3000
Title
Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Legislation
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
45
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 /> • Mme. Chair: No. [unintelligible] fails by a nine to two vote. <br /> Rep. Jameson: I move zero two four. <br /> Mme. Chair: Representative Jameson moves zero two four. Seconded by whom? <br /> Representative Plant? <br /> Rep. Plant: Yes. <br /> [crosstalk] <br /> Mme. Chair: Representative Jamison? <br /> Rep. Jamison: Thank you, Madam Chair. This is basically to say that we're talking <br /> about recreational water rights, and we can't extend this to cover any <br /> in- stream diversions to protect the national environment. In other <br /> words, you know, we have ditches that are straight as a line, you <br /> know. If the property right owner chooses to let those go awry a <br /> little bit, to restore the natural flow, and I think back to the <br /> presentation of what we had in Representative Alexander's district <br /> with the [unintelligible] fork of the Gunnison, his restoration project <br /> going on there, and we're talking about not removing any water, but <br /> Letting the river reclaim its natural path, and under this type.of thing I <br /> don't want this type of water right to interfere with anything like that <br /> happening. And I think the only way to do that is to actually spell <br /> that out, and that's what zero two four does. <br /> Mme. Chair: Representative Spradley? <br /> Rep. Spradley: Thank yod. Madam Chairman, I ask for a no vote on this. I think <br /> that what this is doing is currently under the current laws, without <br /> the amendment, [audio interference] environmentalists can obtain <br /> these water rights through their local governments or country <br /> governments, and if you open this amendment up, and you accept <br /> this amendment, you open the floodgates to additional uses and <br /> without providing any benefits. <br /> The second thing is, and I think this is really important, if you do this <br /> you have opened this up to the federal government and state <br /> government of acquiring these kinds of water rights. I don't think <br /> you want to go there. <br /> Mme. Chair: Representative Rippy? <br /> • <br /> May 7, 2001 <br /> Page 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.