Senate Bill 212 Transcript: Exhibit A-B

Home Browse Search

suggested there are those who say we haven't done enough and the'Wildlife Federation are among those. We do believe that there is room for improvement and Progress can be made, for example in the area of enforcement of the existing instrearn flow water rights. I think the time has comes to think about how we might better ensure that those paper rights that are on the books are translated as to wet water in the stream. Stream gaging and public notice so that fishermen and others who are out there may be able to ensure that the water that is supposed to be in the stream is in fact there. Other areas of concerns are the size'of the water rights. I was quite impressed when I first became familiar with Colorado's instream flow program upon arriving in the state four years ago. The magnitude.of the number of filings -- I've seen a copy of computer printouts -- this goes on in a hundred or more cases, but if you look at the form You realize that first one is I cfs, the second one is 3 cfs -- they are all in that range with very few exceptions. I think miost of us would agree that a couple of cfs is far from what is required to protect the environment to a reasonable degree. But instead of moving forward toward those and strengthening our position as I would like to see this committee do, this bill I think is essentially a step in the wrong direction. It addresses as I understand it two issues primarily. One is who may acquire an instream flow water right and secondly who may enforce ad'stream flow water right, and I will take up those two issues in sequenCe. First, on the issue of acquisition of water rights by private Parties, a citizen, municipality, and so on other than the Board.. I think we.need to ask what is the problem; I don't see a•problem.out there. I don't see that the floodgate has been opened and that the WE