BOARD02257

• Board Meeting Date: 3/13/1963
• Description: Table of Contents, Agenda and Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

MR. SPARKS:
MR. STAPLETON:
I MR. PETERSON:
MR. STAPLETON:
.$. SPARKS :

MR. STAPLETON

I

MR. SPARKS:

committee is this bill in?"

"Game and Fish."

"And ask for a hearing, an opportunity to
express our opinion on this matter?"

"Anything necessary to defeat the bill."

"What do you think of that, Larry?"

"I express no opinion on the bill. I have
stated what I consider the effects to be.
There is a real problem here which has been
occasioned and is particularly evident on the
Fraser River and the Upper Colorado River. As
a result of transmountain diversions in that
area the fishery value of the Fraser River and
the Upper Colorado River has been largely
destroyed and I'm sure the intent of this bill
is to attempt to preserve the fishery values
of the streams of the State of Colorado. Un-
fortunately the question here is this, what has
the highest value in Colorado on the use of
water? Is it for fisheries or is it for appro-
priations? This bill, in effect, assuming that
it is constitutional, would invalidate the con-
stitutional provision that the waters of this
state shall be subject to appropriation because
they would no longer be subject to appropriation
if this bill was passed, by the people of the
State of Colorado. They would be subject exclu-
sively to appropriation by the State of Colorado.
So this bill would kill the constitutional pro-
vision."

"I'm not a lawyer but aren't you really say-
ing it's unconstitutional then?"

"\'lell, perhaps you can get around the Con-
stitution by arguing (and I can see some validity
to this argument) that this is an appropriation
under the Constitution. The net effect, of
course, however, is to prevent further appropria-
tions. If the Legislature says this is an
authorized appropriation by the State of Colorado