My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01993
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD01993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:09:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:06:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
11/15/1984
Description
Agenda, Minutes, Memos
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.
/
112
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 />" <br /> <br />- - <br /> <br />power revenues. and (2) the distribution of revenues among the <br />four Upper Division states. The draft does not cover the third ~ <br />element of the Board's February 16. 1984. proposal pending the <br />completion of deliberations by the Board committee which is <br />addressing this issue (copy of rough draft of amendments <br />attached to Appendix J). <br /> <br />Aaenda Item 17 - Consideration of Water Development Policies <br />and Strateqies for Colorado - Appendix K <br /> <br />In his discussion of this item. Mr. McDonald noted that in <br />recent months there has been growing commentary from various <br />quarters on the lack of a "state water plan" for Colorado. <br />This is evidenced by several things--discussions at the <br />Colorado Water Congress' August seminar. statements emanating <br />from activities concerning the development of additional water <br />supplies for the Denver metropolitan area. recent articles in <br />the press. the theme of the upcoming 1984 Water Convention. and <br />statements made by some candidates for office in the recent <br />elections. <br /> <br />Despite the wide ranging expressions o~ interest in this <br />topic. there is a distinct lack of agreement over what a "state <br />water plan" should be or. more important. whether there should <br />even be one. Furthermore. there seems to be a lack of <br />understanding of and appreciation for the role of state <br />government. as defined by statute. in water development . <br />activities. There is also continuing confusion about the <br />responsibilities which various agencies have for water project <br />development in Colorado. <br /> <br />In the commentary of the past several months. use of the <br />term "state water plan" seems usually to have carried the <br />connotation that there should be a master blueprint for the <br />development of new water projects. The question of who would <br />implement such a plan--who would decide which projects are to <br />go forward and which are not--is usually passed over or one is <br />left with the vague impression that state government has the <br />authority to make these decisions. <br /> <br />In Mr. McDonald's view. this notion of a "state water plan" <br />is inapplicable to the water rights system we have in <br />Colorado. There is no authority or place for such a plan under <br />Colorado statutes. Indeed. such a "state water plan" would be <br />the very antithesis of the state's prior appropriation system. <br />which leaves decisions concerning the use. development. and <br />transfer of water to individual appropriators and the economic <br />forces of the marketplace. <br /> <br />Rather than talking in terms of a "state water plan," Mr. <br />McDonald suggested that it would be more useful and <br />constructive to frame discussions in terms of the pOlicies and <br />strategies which state government can effect in order to . <br /> <br />-16- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.