Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />determine whether or not the Supreme Court will hear an appeal from the <br />Circuit Court. which was a divided court order. <br /> <br />In the new Rainbow Bridge case. the United States has filed an answer. <br />It.will be my recommendation to the board and Mr. Sparks that I don't,.", <br />th1nk we need any further legislative authorization. I think the resti- <br />lution which the legislature passed covers the Rainbow Bridge case also. <br />It would be my recommendation that the state of Colorado proceed now tQ~ <br />intervene in those proceedings. We had a meeting about a month ago on:. <br />this and decided at that time to wait until we found out what action <br />had been taken by the United States. Since that time. the United States <br />has filed its answer. I think it is now timely for the state of Colo- <br />rado to file a petition for intervention in that case. It is my under- <br />standing that the state of Utah will intervene. The Colorado River <br />Water Conservation District and the Southeastern Colorado Water Conserva- <br />tion District have both petitioned for intervention. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Thank you. Mr. Moses. How about the director's report? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: First, I want to elaborate a little on what Mr. Moses has <br />said. The state is involved in important litigation on water matters. <br />In addition to the Rainbow Bridge case. which we have already partici- <br />pated in once and which went to the United States Supreme Court. we <br />are faced with essentially the same litigation again. This time the <br />case was filed by various Navajo Indians. The board has already adopted <br />a resolution requesting the Governor and the Attorney General to autho- <br />.tltze an intervention in the case. Mr. Moses and I met with the Attorney. <br />~neral with respect to this matter. . <br /> <br />We have other important cases pending. such as the Akin case that Ray <br />Moses mentioned involving the rights of the Indians. and also the rights <br />of the federal government to water for national forests. BLM, national <br />parks and monuments. and so on. As a matter of fact. in all of the <br />water divisions of western Colorado there are similar cases pending on <br />claims filed by the United States. In each case. the state has entered <br />those cases. The outcome of those cases is extremely important to the <br />citizens of the state of Colorado. Historically this board has directed <br />the course of those cases. We have employed counsel with the consent <br />of the Attorney General. What we feared most has happened. We are <br />now experiencing a complete change in the attitude of the Attorney <br />General. Apparently, new and inexperienced people will be handling <br />these important cases. Continuity in these matters which take many <br />years to complete is being ignored. <br /> <br />Just one other brief note. We now have pending our comments on the <br />field draft of the Two Forks project. That has been lying on my desk <br />now for over a month. I have been afraid to make any comment in view <br />of all the political speeches that have been made about water resource <br />development in recent months. However, we are faced with making a <br />decision. Many thousands of dollars have been spent in the preparation <br />of that report. It was prepared in response to a request by this board. <br />I am attempting to get an audience with the Governor-elect to advise <br />him of this and to get some guidance from him so that I can advise the <br />board as to his attitude. We are actually supposed to have our comments <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />-62- <br />