My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01250
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01250
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:59:22 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:51:59 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
12/9/1964
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
76
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />I <br /> <br />this statement, 'It is the recommendation of <br />this board that the statutes of this state be <br />amended and revised to embody the principle <br />that all waters occurring in the State of Colo- <br />rado are the property of the people, subject <br />to appropriation.'. Now we don't need any <br />revision of anything to adopt this principle. <br />This principle was the law of Colorado before <br />the Constitution. Coffin vs.the Left Hand <br />Ditch Company distinguished Colorado from <br />California on the basis that we had never had <br />any different law and the reason that Califor- <br />nia got into such a mess is that they decreed <br />the cutoff date and said the appropriation <br />doctrine applied in California from this date <br />on. Lands pumping before that date had riparian <br />rights, and California, by an amendment about <br />five years ago to its constitution, tried to <br />correct the situation and failed. <br /> <br />Now the official action of a board of <br />this caliber is important in that a declaration <br />in so many words by this Board may be used <br />with respect to Colorado's rights in the <br />Congress of the United states. They may be <br />used anywhere. Therefore, I would hope that <br />the language employed be very carefully <br />scrutinized by some who have had a lot of <br />experience in this, many of whom are present <br />here, so that we'll be certain that there is <br />no statement here that can ever be used against <br />the State of Colorado. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />That is the thing that I am particularly <br />concerned about in this whole letter. I think <br />there are things here that need careful study <br />before an official position is taken, even on <br />principles. There are principles in here that <br />I think are totally unconstitutional. There <br />are some cutoff dates here that I don't think <br />are constitutional at all. You cannot cut off <br />as of January I, 1950, or January 1, 1960, <br />some decreed water rights, as I believe. All <br />the way through here there are some things <br />that I think require a good deal of study and <br />polish before they are made the official <br />policy of the water Board of the state. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.