Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />in S. 702. The House of Representatives Public Land Subcommittee of <br />Interior Insular Affairs Committee will next Thursday consider its <br />companion bill, H. R. 6242, which has still in it the original <br />boundaries that were the same as S. 702. So this matter is moving <br />along in the United States Congress and I think, Mr. Chairman, that <br />completes my remarks. I certainly would be happy to answer questions. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Rolly, let's divorce ourselves, if we can, from the <br />specific fight you and the Power Company have had. Do you consider <br />in the abstract a resolution such as this, addressed as it is to <br />the Congressional delegation and to the Congress, is an erosion of <br />our long stated position of supremacy of water rights? <br /> <br />Mr. Rollv Fischer: I would like not to use the word erosion. I <br />do not consider it a threat to the long standing position of water <br />rights. r would urge that this board must consider the realities of <br />what is going to happen in the Rocky Mountain West. I think that <br />this board must recognize that we are going to have wilderness areas. <br />I think that we must find a way through this board, and if this <br />board doesn't do it, I think that it might be done for us, Mr. Chair- <br />man. Let's find a way to make comptatible Colorado's use of its <br />constitutional guarantee and state court decreed water rights in <br />light of the fact that we are going to have other wilderness areas <br />designated in the state. <br /> <br />We think that the Colorado River Water Conservation District's <br />position on this does achieve that compatibility. There are certainly <br />many opportunities for the erosion of Colorado's constitution guar- <br />anteed and state court jurisdiction to water rights positions. Those <br />erosions can come through salinity. They can come through treaties <br />with Mexico. r have had some conversation with Attorney Moses about <br />the state department's position on the Brownell proposal as set <br />forth in Minute 242. This is an erosion of Colorado's constitutional <br />guarantee of water rights. <br /> <br />I think that the seeds of a threat are there. I urge that this <br />board be very aggressive in taking positions that will reduce that <br />threat. r think the River District proposal in this specific <br />instance is one way of doing it. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Rolly, I have never run for public office and I can <br />understand if I were running for public office that environmental <br />impact would be very important, but'r sit-here as an appointed member <br />of the state board trying to evaluate how our limited water resources <br />can be preserved. I am firmly convinced in my own mind that this <br />is the first step towards the abdication of our firm position in <br />terms of supremacy of state water rights. I think we have gotten <br />ourselves into a box where personalities in litigation and this thing, <br /> <br />-13- <br />