Laserfiche WebLink
<br />JJl3~5 <br /> <br />to the McCarren Admendment and should be administered <br />.~ ~hn~~ <br />witrr" the State's)priority system. <br /> <br />We do not need to address the question of downstream <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />(2) <br /> <br />wilderness water rights at this time since the <br /> <br />pending proposed wildernesses do not include any such <br /> <br />areas. When downstream wilderness areas are <br /> <br />proposed. we must consider the water rights question <br /> <br />on a case-by-case basis. <br /> <br />(3) Any bill should explicitly state that creation of <br /> <br />express federal water rights for headwater wilderness <br /> <br />areas is not a precedent for how the more complex <br /> <br />water issues in downstream areas will be addressed. <br /> <br />Further. the bill should not address or in any way <br /> <br />prejudice pending litigation concerning whether <br /> <br />wilderness areas already designated in Colorado have <br /> <br />implied reserved water rights. <br /> <br />(4) Attention must be paid to the question of wilderness <br /> <br />water rights in the existing North Platte Wilderness <br /> <br />Area. In this case. a solution must be crafted that <br /> <br />will not preempt Colorado water law or impair our <br /> <br />rights under the decree of the U. S. Supreme Court. <br /> <br />(5) Statutory provisions in earlier acts of Congress <br /> <br />concerning water resources facilities and projects <br /> <br />located in wilderness areas. and the water rights <br /> <br />associated therewith. should be affirmed as they <br /> <br />stand. <br /> <br />(6) I have not analyzed the proposed wilderness <br /> <br />boundaries. In concept. boundaries should minimize <br />-2- <br />