Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MR. SPARKS: In each case, Mr. Chairman, we have a complete schedule. of <br />what is contemplated to be done with these funds, which in almost every <br />case is a continuation of construction or in some cases a completion of <br />a definite plan report, such as in th~ case. of the Animas-La Plata, San <br />Miguel, West Divide and Front Range, We know the proposed schedule. <br />We think the schedule. is a good one. We believe the fund~ are adequate <br />in every case to carry out the schedule as set forth for each. of the. <br />projects. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In the President's budget message itself there is a brief summary of' <br />. the purposes of all.of these appropriatiqns, what items of construction <br />would take place or what items of planning would take place. As Mr. <br />Kroeger has said, there are no funds included for the initial construc- <br />tion on the Animas-~a Plata project. We have some indication that the <br />Bureau could use funds to initiate the beginning elements of construction <br />for that project. Actually, we were delighted with the Ford budget. We <br />thought it was the finest reclamation budget we have ever seen in the <br />history of Colorado. We were, therefore, fully prepared ~o suppQrt it. <br />We have had a number of problems over the years with what we considered <br />insufficient budgets,. but we were delighted with the budget submitted in <br />the latter part of January. We think it's a good budget and'we think <br />it should be supported by the' Board and by the people of the conservancy <br />districts inVOlved. L"might add, by the way, that most of the conser- <br />vancy districts involved in this budget are represented here today. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: I'am concerned, as a practical matter, if the adminis- <br />tration asks us what we have do~e to reduce these projects, what we have <br />done in view of their particular attitude towards reclamation? Have we <br />any review? Have we cut any fat out? Have we made any other decisions <br />or. have we. just said what we have done before is adequate and correct and <br />no other consideration given to it? . <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: Mr. Chairman, eve~y proje~t.that is in construction status <br />.has undergone very intense review. In every case we have made significant <br />changes in the projects, in the past three y~ars particularly, and. not <br />only the ones under construction status, but the ones also that are in <br />the definite plan stage. For instance, we have revised the reservoir <br />plan for the Animas-La Plata project. At this time it looks like we <br />have eliminated the ~ain ~ontroversy .for the west Divide project, which <br />was a reservoir on the Crystal River, We have reduced the acreage of I <br />the Savery-Pot Hook and the Fruitland Mes~prqject in response to pro- <br />tests by the Division of Wildlife. We have made major changes in every <br />project to the point where they are all considerably less in scope than <br />what was originally planned ~nd authorized by Congress. <br /> <br />We have reduced the water supply for all projects in order to make our <br />water go further. The Dallas Creek, Fruitland Mesa, Savery-Pot Hook, <br />west Divide, all of these Projects we have reduced them in scope to try <br /> <br />-6- <br />