Laserfiche WebLink
1984] COLORADO'S WATER RESOURCES 405 <br /> which the policies articulated in the 1970 National Environmental <br /> Policy Act are to be implemented, has forced an almost exhaustive <br /> examination of any "major federal action significantly affecting the <br /> quality of the human environment."" <br /> • The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act, coupled <br /> with the requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement, has <br /> complicated the use of federal lands for water projects and has <br /> delayed or prevented development because of its permit <br /> requirements. <br /> The list of federal environmental legislation is long. It is com- <br /> prehensive. It is a fitting list in its scope, complexity and compliance <br /> cost for a government that also financed reclamation, flood control <br /> and harbor projects for many, many years. The restraints imposed <br /> are equal to the forces commenced, but the swing has been abrupt <br /> and extensive. <br /> III. THE COLORADO RESPONSE TO THE POST-1970 RE- <br /> STRAINTS ON WATER DEVELOPMENT <br /> As could be expected, Colorado's response to the environmental <br /> revolution and the reduction in federal funds for water development <br /> has been less dramatic than the swings just described at the federal <br /> level. There has been no dramatic state assumption of financial re- <br /> sponsibility for any water projects. There have been modest asser- <br /> tions of a state role in environmental protection and attempts at <br /> plans and studies to bring the two into a sound working relationship. <br /> A. The Colorado Response To a Decline In Federal Funds for <br /> for Water Projects <br /> 1. The Colorado Water Conservation Board Construction <br /> Fund. <br /> In 1971, the Colorado legislature approved a program to fund <br /> small water projects through the Colorado Water Conservation <br /> Board.ea It has been used, in effect, to loan funds, with low interest <br /> rates, for small irrigation and municipal water projects. More re- <br /> cently, it has been limited to projects that develop new water, rather <br /> than projects that merely distribute or treat water ea New water de- <br /> velopment has included rehabilitating dams so decreed rights can be <br /> 91. 42 U.S.C.S. § 4332(2)(C) (Law Co-op 1982). <br /> 92. CoLo. REV. STAT. §§ 37-60-119 to 122 (1973). <br /> 93. 1981 Colo. Sess. Laws 1769-70. <br />