BOARD00985

• Board Meeting Date: 2/5/1969
• Description: Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

might address ourselves to the solution of
the problem. I might say additionally that
I personally and members of the Advisory
Committee have attended each of the hearings
and listened to the discussions and the pre-
sentations made by Mr. Geissinger and his
committee. We have a familiarity with those
bills, but we did not address ourselves as
an Advisory Committee to the content of that
legislation.

I

I think it is the concensus of the Ad-
visory Committee that the draft before you
addresses itself to the principle and main
problem which the legislature directed that
this state should address itself to under
Senate Bill 407. I think there is the dis-
tinct concensus of opinion by the Advisory
Committee that the procedures would permit
the kind of integration that the legislature
envisioned under Senate Bill 407; that per-
mits. if you will. a time for the water
users. not only of direct flow rights but the
wells that operate in the same area. to. in
effect. propose amendments or modifications
of their decrees which would permit the con-
junctive use of the waters. both taken from
the surface streams and recovered by with-
drawals from the well heads. This is a
matter that takes some time. They should
be permitted some time within which to solve
their mutual problems. Someone mentioned
earlier that these are people who are both
surface and groundwater users. in most cases.
as that map of the Arkansas clearly indicates.
The Platte is not much different.

We think that the manner in which this
problem is approached in this bill limits
itself to doing the job of integration with
more guidelines as to how it is done. Mem-
bers of the Advisory Committee. quite frankly
Mr. Chairman. on the point that you asked
Mr. Sparks to explain. have no concensus of
opinion at this point on whether or not the

I