Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-' .. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Governor Romer - Kansas v. Colorado <br />March 21, 1994 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />required to repay Kansas approximately 300,000 to 400,000 <br />acre feet. <br /> <br />4. will Colorado be willing to negotiate a settlement? <br /> <br />Colorado should try to negotiate a settlement, and has made <br />several overtures to Kansas throughout this litigation. <br />These overtures have been rejected. To date, Kansas has been <br />unwilling to enter into settlement negotiations. This <br />litigation will continue for at least four more years. It <br />makes no sense to continue to spend millions of dollars on <br />attorneys and engineers if we are in a position to work with <br />the state of Kansas to achieve a solution that is mutually <br />acceptable to water users in both states. <br /> <br />S. will Colorado take appropriate steps to defend our interests <br />in Phase 2 of the litigation (the liabilities or remedies <br />phase of the trial)? <br /> <br />Yes, the state will undertake whatever defense is necessary, <br />as long as funds continue to be appropriated for this effort <br />by the legislature. <br /> <br />6. Why is the state Engineer proposing to require flow meters, <br />or the use of power coefficients~ to obtain information on <br />the use of tributary ground water? <br /> <br />The portion of the draft Master's ruling of greatest interest <br />to Colorado should be his obvious dissatisfaction in the way <br />that the state has regulated the use of groundwater in the <br />Arkansas River Basin. Colorado was criticized by the Master <br />for lack of recordkeeping on groundwater use. The state must <br />determine real water use for administrative purposes. <br />Moreover, data on water use will be of benefit to Colorado, <br />because we believe the draft Master's report may result in <br />Colorado being charged for more groundwater pumping than is <br />actually occurring. In particular; we believe Colorado wells <br />were not pumping as much water as the Master may indicate. <br />Both Colorado's and Kansas' cases were based on assumptions <br />about pumping derived from incomplete power data, not hard <br />data. Approximately one-half of the wells have been tested, <br />and efficiency is lower than was anticipated. Therefore, <br />good dat,a will help prepare our case for Phase 2 of the <br />triaL It will also allow us to properly and fairly <br />administer water users in the Arkansas River Basin. <br />