Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MUSICK, WILLIAMSON, (5. COPE, P. C. <br /> <br />ATTORNEyS AT LAW <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />March 9, 1981 <br /> <br />WILL'A'" T. SMITH, ..JR. <br />ROBERT f". WIGINGTON <br />RICHARO M. FOSTER, .JR. <br />ROBERT C. KERR <br /> <br />mD r~ffi~l7q~ <br />: MAR 1 0 1981 <br />. <br />~ J <br /> <br />75 MANHATTAN DRIVE <br />P. O. eox 4579 <br />BOULOER, COLORADO 80306 <br />TELEPHONE <3031 "'99.3990 <br /><COl.Oll-aOO 332-21410 <br /> <br />..JOHN D. MUSICK. ..JR. <br />STEPHEN T. Wll"l.IAJ04S0N <br />,JOSEPH A. COP!!: <br /> <br />Mr. J. W:i,ll:i,wn McDonul&>". ;'.:,,,f'.,\',, .) <br />Director, Water Conservation Board <br />1313 Sherman, Room 823 <br />State Centennial Building <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />Dear Bill: <br /> <br />Recently, the Colorado Water Conservation Board has been <br />giving serious attention to establishing new priorities and criteria <br />for funding water development projects in the State of Colorado. <br />At its last meeting on February 11, 1981, the Board appeared <br />to be move closer toward a consensus position as to what kind <br />of projects should receive state financial support through the <br />Board. This position from our vantage point could be summarized <br />as follows: <br /> <br />1] Due to the danger of COlorado losing its share of unap- <br />propriated Colorado River water to lower basin states <br />primary emphasis should be focused on funding new storage <br />projects in the Colorado River Basin. For similar reasons, <br />storage projects on the Platte River should also be <br />given funding priority, although perhaps not as high <br />a priority as those on the Colorado River. One important <br />reason for giving a higher priority to Colorado projects <br />is to avoid having the State of Colorado bear the brunt <br />of federally imposed salinity control projects which <br />may be forced on the latter appropriators on the River. <br /> <br />2]. Funding of municipal distribution facilities should <br />be given a low priority and perhaps no priority at <br />all unless such facilities contribute to the primary <br />goal of capturing unused water from the Colorado. <br /> <br />3] A small amount of funding, perhaps 25%, should be spent <br />for increasing the efficiency of existing facilities <br />on the theory that as they get older, existing facilities <br />inevitably begin to incur signficant losses of water. <br /> <br />"\ e <br />