WSP01884 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

-8- The motion waS seconded by Mr. R. B. Williams and was carried unanimously. Mr. Dod~ suggtsted that there should be a resolution adopted as to a policy of distribution of revenues from the project, and that such revenues be used within the natural watershed in the Upper Basin States, in the same proportions as the allocations Qf consumptive use under the Compact. He also suggested that any bill for the construction of Echo Park and Gunnison River dams should indicate where revenues ther~from should be applied. Judge Stone pointed out that this meeting could not s~t a policy for the other affected states of the Upper BaSin, 1'11d warned against qasty conclusions which might be inequitable. Mr. Brei.tenst'in advised that the report of the Bureau of Reclamation would ultimately co tain initial list of participating projects on which power re- venues were to be eJCpended, and that it was a matter for each individual state to determine which projects should be included, and how its allocation of water should be used. ' , Mr. Dodd then 'moved the adoption of the following resolution as a recommended policy for Colorado: "R:esolved that, until it shall be demonstrated by complete survey, and study that there is a surplus of water for diversion to Eas,tern Colorado, no power revenues derived from units of the Color~~o River Storage Project shall be used to assist in the eonstrllct.j,on of any transmountain diversion to Eastern Colorado." Tbe motion was' secor.~8d My ~r. Peterson and carried unanimously. In answer to a: Clues t:i.0n by Mr. Neill as to the ownershi.p of the water in the regulatory re~"eh01,rs, [WI'" Breitenstein and ':!JJ;o..Tipt.cn emnha8j.zec. that the Basin Stat.en owned t,lf' use o{"U;e water, and that the water was held in trust for the Lower Basin to be r8Yeased under the terms of the Colorado River Compact. In res,,0nse to, a question, Mr. Larson stated that the nf't evaporation losses from all the m~j.n st",m reservoirs had been estimated to average 800..000 acre feet annually. Judge Stone Y>31lled the projeds in the v:i.cinity f:)r wY\icl, rerorts were sub- stantially comp13\8, rnd which might be placeil C:l the :;'ri:~'.j a1 lLs'~. d participat- ing projects, and asl}ed for recommendations by the group. Mr. Tipton co~ented on the modest number of suc~ projects and asked whether the report on the GU1')nison River project was sufficiently cO'1lpll'lted so that addi- tional irrigable lan~s could be included in participating projects. Mr. LarsQn ans~ered that the criteria for such projects had not been de- finitely established~' thus precluding the consideration of3uch :.:ri1~ at the present time.' . I .i _. -L . '''--~' .'..".~-_c';;_ <':'4-, -~" "