Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the Congress concerning national water policy. The commission was to <br />be in existence for a period of five years and was to make its report <br />within that time. <br /> <br />The report is approximately fifteen hundred pages in length and weighs I'~ <br />several pounds. It is very comprehensive, but rather poorly organized. <br />Interested parties are requested to submit their comments on the <br />report not later than January 15, 1973. Since that initial report <br />was issued and because of numerous protests about the length of time, <br />the commission has now extended the time for comments to February 15, <br />1973. <br /> <br />The report proposes drastic changes in national water poliqy. A <br />prevailing theme of the report is that direct beneficiaries of various <br />projects should pay the total cOst. Another prevailing theme is <br />that the matter of water development should be primarily a state and <br />local responsibility, rather than a federal responsibility. <br /> <br />As the Chairman has stated, at the request of the Colorado Water <br />Congress and various members of this board, Governor Love canceled <br />the scheduled testimony of the state of Colorado before the National <br />Water Commission at Phoenix, Arizona on January 11. This was done to <br />provide more time for the state to formulate its position concerning <br />the proposed report. The state will now present its comments in <br />,1ashington, D. C. on February 8, 1973. There is a prevailing thought <br />that these comments should be presented by the Governor himself. I <br />believe that we should attempt to prevail upon the Governor to per- <br />sonally present the state's comments. <br /> <br />In view of the complexity of the proposed report, it is extremely <br />difficult to formulate a state position. Most of the recommendations <br />are along the line of vmat we have already been trying to do. Many <br />of the recommendations, however, if adopted, would effect funda- <br />mental changes in federal water policy. <br /> <br />Over a hundred conclusions and recommendations are set forth in the <br />report. . For discussion purposes, I shall enumerate those conclusions <br />and recommendations which seem to be most important insofar as major <br />federal policy changes are involved. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />An initial conclusion of the commission is that while water resource <br />projects have had very significant impact on regional economic <br />development and population distribution in the past, their role has <br />now greatly diminished. This Was one of the key points that the <br /> <br />-3- <br />