My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02572
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02572
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:37:32 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:13:22 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.470
Description
Pacific Southwest Interagency Committee
State
CO
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Water Division
5
Date
4/5/1978
Author
PSIAC
Title
Minutes of the 78-1 Meeting - April 5-6 1978
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br /> <br />Colonel Vandenberg. If I can paraphrase Phil's question here, <br />I would like to get an expression of the feelings of members of the <br />Committee as to whether this type of data gathering and planning <br />activity should be expanded to other parts of the Great Southwest <br />desert. That accurate enough Phil? <br /> <br />Mr. Macias. Well, reaction to this. <br /> <br />Mr. Raetz. I think it will be done whatever we say. <br /> <br />Mr. Slingerland. I'm not too familiar with what BLM does. But <br />I think in New Mexico, that they are pretty responsive to problems. <br />When something happens they, I'm not sure they go into it in detail <br />in a study as Neil has here. But I think they have been trying to <br />cope with the problem. That's my understanding, now Ken might be <br />able to help a little. Aren't they quite responsive in this area, <br />Ken? <br /> <br />Mr. Schroeder. Yes, they have the state well divided up into <br />units and they are progressing quite well. The big thing is <br />personnel and money to go into the detail that has been described <br />here. <br /> <br />Mr. Slingerland. Now, did they try to coordinate between states? <br /> <br />Mr. Pfulb. Yes, there is naturally a system for coordination <br />internally. The Bureau's planning system does, was built from the <br />ground up you might say, and being built from the ground up relied <br />heavily on dividing the area into smaller geographic units for plan- <br />ing, and assigning that responsibility for inventory and planning <br />basically to the area managers, who then developed the recommendation <br />the district manager who adopts the plan. The difference, that is <br />happening as a result of all the things that are on, that have been <br />happening the last ten years where your geographic extent of major <br />proposals is difficult to visualize on a small geographic basis. <br />That's why in many cases the Bureau is enlarging, they're expanding, <br />their planning focus, their planning approach, have to address these <br />broader problems. Such as the coal leasing problem. Things like <br />that where you have to really, to understand how the little unit <br />fits. Let's look at the large regional view. But it is difficult <br />to do this kind of thing without some sort of special support in <br />funding, in programs, to accomplish it. Because. otherwise the <br />Bureau is limited. But is making progress, as has been mentioned <br />here, on a unit by unit approach. That has been the direction the <br />Bureau has gone on planning for management in the last ten years and <br />they are making good progress. But it is because of these limita- <br />tions that it has to be done on a unit by unit approach. Except <br />where there is special recognition for funding for a large area. <br /> <br />B-20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.