Board Meeting 05/03/1985 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Mr. David Getches Page Seven • Such a review is especially appropriate in this context. One of the Act's more controversial features in this region has been its purported interference with expectations created under state water rights systems. To the extent that the Coordinating Committee members desire to minimize the potential for such conflicts, it is necessary to examine how state water rights systems could be modified to protect instream values. A number of western states have very recently begun the process of reforming their water law systems to provide at least some opportunity for protection of environmental values dependent upon flowing water. These recent reforms provide a useful star- ting place for identifying the types of changes that should be considered. These include, among others, the recognition of instream flows as beneficial uses, the establishment of private rights to purchase and hold instream flow appropriations, estab- lishment of minimum flow programs, and the enactment of laws- regulating riparian development. Without a careful examination of approaches such as these, we believe the Committee will have overlooked a potentially . .important component of a comprehensive plan for the future of the river and its resources. Thus, we intend to recommend that the Committee consider revisions to state water laws as a corollary to consideration of changes to federal law. • In closing, we want to reiterate our commitment to form- ulating a long-range plan for protecting the endangered living resources of the Colorado River, while assuring the optimum utilization of its water resources. We would be happy to discuss these ideas with you. Respectfully, Daniel F. - Senior Scientist =mes -�in -.taff Attorney e, © Y Environmental Defense Fund Environmental Defense Fund Ji Ma L. Fox Colorado •9 Unlimited Sie • ub Southw=st Regional Office 111