WSP00294 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Memo to Sen Ament? RECEIVED SEP 2 5 1995 ~~ - -f~st- ~ a-/ ' I ~.... ---;) Ir<.. .IJ^. \l..\..e:it $ ~f ~ \Jf"$'\ .fo(C. A tJ F \\-\ lit'.> 1'1 IS. 1'.'''''00 N ~ IlL \ evJ"",... . Intro Colorado Water Conservation Board pleased to brief you, although we generally share the widely-held perception that Dave Miller is merely frustrated that his potential profits from the proposed Union Park project continue to elude him; unfortunate that he has resorted to allegations of CONSPIRACY AGAINST HIM; truth is, his suggestion that CWCB should have intervened in transactions between WCDs and the Bureau of Reclamation are RADICAL and ILL-CONSIDERED; obvious Dave Miller is simply looking for another forum in which he can pursue his personal views and profits (he has failed to convince the Corps that Union Park was a viable alternative to Two Forks worth consideratw'o ' its,EIS, or lq c\w.vince the, , "I ,kg l...l, ....+....,_ L.....".I.",I,..... ---/H<c. oAW_r--l"........, 4' f:.-,.", Colorado Supreme Court, the Attorney General, or e Legislative Audit Committee that '" his alleged conspiracies, misrepresentations, and errors warrant further consideration; he has even tried to insert himself into thE: Kansas vs Colorado proceedings without success); hardly appears to be grounds for a Legislative investigation ofthe CWCB; o,r. ( I fOo""- ~-4,.sQ..r"" N l,.Uo-tq('" Discussion c 1-,Jj,il,l-r.-r' ,/)s ~),...':l"1f:; ~1~~ . . .p,( "" Il~ R_c.' ~o ~!IJ. T~ t tr-r . true that CWCB didn't onDose the transfer of water nghts to the BuRec; generally F'~,;; ~" . . . ,"~"'a"'l~ ~,ree~tj ~ . ",u. a accepted prac:lc~ong water users mId the BuRec to coordmate the management 0 J .\.1.... A. ~"<l storage and dlverslOn1 ..,.<.tt1J.",-I-~ .f+..' 8Jwe./?.sa. fl..",-w" w"-" o/I>S,J, (.o.~'" r true that CWCB doesn't usually intervene in such transactions to impose state priorities; generally accept that such priorities are represented appropriately in the statutory and judicial development of Colorado's water law; CWCB doesn't usually intervene unless the potential for conflict with established priorities is clear; although tension over transmountain diversions continue)to be strong, UNTRUE that there has been a conspiracy between the CWCB, the West Slope, and the federal government to place the waters of the Ounnison (or any other) River "off-limits" for the communities of the East Slope; if this oonspiracy theory had any credibility, Dave Miller would not stand alone as its champion! untrue that the six sites studied in the Taylor River were so far below the reservoir and intervening tribs to undermine the scierltific credibility of the studies relied upon in the water court proceedings; 2 of the 6 sites were less than 1 mile below the reservoir and the relative increase in brown trout abundance at these sites was higher than at any other sites in 2 of the 4 years of the study; the use of this information was appropriately scrutinized in the court proceedings; untrue that "neither the CWCB or the higher court was willing to review factual errors;" the CWCB members and staff have spent considerable time and effort reviewing the outcome of these proceedings with Dave Miller, with the State Auditor, with the Attorney General's Office, with various Legislators, and with many representatives of water interests (from both the East and West Slope!); the Colorado Supreme Court's review is a matter of record; . -....... ,- . G? . . . . . . .