Laserfiche WebLink
<br />to a suit being brought against the United States in this matter.As- <br />a general rule, the United States cannot be sued without its consent, <br />absent some _special_ statutory authority.- However, I assume that <br />the suit in that particular case originates under the Environmental <br />Protection Act and the authority to sue under that act. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In any event, it is an unfortunate situation. The Governor and our <br />various congressional members are: being beseiged by both sides to <br />entertain the views of the particular side which happens to see the <br />senator or congressman at any particular moment. The congressional <br />delegation and the Governor are somewhat dismayed at this inhouse <br />fighting occurring in Colorado. <br /> <br />This board was a signatory party to the-operating principles for the <br />Fryingpan-Arkansas project. It was this board which negotiated those <br />operating principles. The state of Colorado is a signatory party to <br />those operating principles through the Governor who executed the <br />operating principles on behalf of the state. Those operating- principles <br />were adopted by the Congress and incorporated into and made a part of <br />the authorizing legislation for the Fryingpan-Arkansas: project. There <br />is no question but_that the state has an obligation to see that those <br />operating principles are carried- out as nearly-as that can be done. : <br />If this litigation continues, it is probable that the state will <br />intervene either: in the instant case, or by an Original a-c:tion in -the <br />United States Supreme Court against the Secretary Dr the Interior, if <br />the Secretary of the Interior operates the project in violation of the <br />agreement and the law. We have the authority under the act itself, <br />the operating principles, to institute sui~ in an original action in <br />the Supreme Court against the Secretary of the Interior if he fails to <br />carry out the operating principles. - At some t:ime, unless this matter <br />is settled, and if it is adverse to what we think -is the intent and <br />meaning of the operating principles, the state of Colorado may become <br />a party to that litigation in one forum or another. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />It seems that the matter could be quite easily settled if we can get <br />the parties to agree to some reasonable approval.: The United States <br />Forest Service has done a study of what it considers to be :the minimum <br />streamflows required on Hunter Creek to preserve the enVironment and <br />the fishery values. That study was concluded recently _ and copies were <br />furnished to our board. The recoIlllllendations of the Forest Service are <br />somewhat higher than the recommendations previously given to us by the <br />Fish and Wildlife Service, another federal agency. : What we have at- <br />this time is a difference of opinion between two federal agencies as to <br />minimum streamflows in Hunter Creek. However, it is our understanding <br />that the Fish and Wildlife Service now agrees with the ~eport issued <br />'by the Forest :Service. Also, as I understand- it, our own- Division of <br />Wildlife feels that the Forest Service study is more accurate than the <br /> <br />-41- <br />