Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I think it would be remiss on my part if I did not call to your <br />attention that this is the first~eeting of tne Colorado Water Con- <br />servation Board in many years that Mr. Ray-Moses has not been here in <br />an official capacity. The Attorney ,Gener~l, in his wisdom, has <br />removed the appropriation for Mr. Moses,-and his position as a legal <br />adviser to this Board is therefore terminated. I know you share with <br />me that deep regret.: I '-ani-'sureyou-and th~ Board me1!lhers and many of <br />the audience will want to join with us in some sort of recognition for <br />Mr. Moses' service on_the Board. , _ <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. ROBBINS~~ May I just comment for' the record? <br /> <br />MR. STAPLEt9~: - Yes. <br /> <br />MR. ROBBINS :-::The Attorney:General did not remove ~the appropriation. <br />Two years ago, he, pursuant to his promises during the camPaign, <br />removed the designations of "Special Assistant Attorney Generals" for <br />private attorneys not working for the State. For the past two years, <br />Mr. Moses has been a consultant to the Board-ou'interstate stream <br />matters. It was the action of the Joint Budget Committee, not the <br />Attorney General. - - : -::::.: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: I .appreciate the comments. <br />correction of my statement; ~ (Laughter.) . <br />. . , "". <br /> <br />~ don't_con.side~ that a <br />, - <br /> <br />Well, as you know, we planned to be down in Cortez this week,:but~the - <br />President has proposed same wat~r resource policies. Those hearings <br />are going to tie held in: Denver tomorrow and the next day and:in other <br />sections of 1;he country about the same time. I have been talking with <br />Larry from:time'1;o ti.nJ.e about thiS.- I~gather that it has:been very,. <br />very recently, that. you got the information-; Larry" I have a feeling <br />from the prelimiriary memorandum that you are not in cOmplete favor of <br />every sentence in it. I think the best way is for people- that have <br />really looked at the report to give us a review. And, Larry, would you <br />start this agenda item qut, please:? -~ <br />.....,.... .. ~ . ....... <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: Mr. Chairman,:Cwe-received our copy of:t~e Federai Re~ster <br />last week on July 20. We made a hasty review of it and sent to t . <br />Board a short memorandum highlighting same of the more controversial <br />items in that publication. It was emphasized at-the outset'that the <br />publication was intended to reflect various options only and that none <br />of the options had actually-as yet been adopted. The feeling is in- <br />escapable, if you can wade through the bureaucratic language that is <br />contained in the report, that there Is: a prevalent attitude in this. <br />administration that the federal government is the onlY'agency which I <br />can properly decide the use of the water resources of the United <br />States. That theme is expressed on almost every page' of the publica- <br />tion. <br /> <br />Many 9f the opt;!.ons are virtu~lly incompreI:tens:i.ble. With_ same full <br />study and perhaps same illumination from_the people who drafted the <br />various options, it might be possible to understand what they had-in <br />mind. <br /> <br />-2- <br />