Laserfiche WebLink
<br />- <br /> <br />Water, water everywhere, but not a drop for Nevada? <br /> <br />To the editor: <br />. The Roan Creek Proposal <br />to supply 175,000 acre feet of wa- <br />ter- - enough to support a popu- <br />lation increase of 700,000 - for <br />use'in Southern Nevada for up to <br />50. years is still alive, <br /> <br />Even though the Review-Jour- <br />na} article of June 6 accurately <br />stated that Colorado Gov. Roy <br />Roltier thinks the proposal would <br />trigger "years of litigation," on <br />May 25 the Executive Committee <br />of the Colorado Legislative Coun- <br />cil. .established an Interim Study <br />Committee to conduct a "busi- <br />ness-like, informative, productive <br />and focused" study that will mon- <br />itot' '''the state effort in the Colo- <br />rado River negotiation;" and de- <br /> <br />.t., <br /> <br />II Of all the alternatives available to <br />supplement Southern Nevada's water <br />supply, the Roan Creek proposal appears <br />to be the most cost-effective. 11 <br /> <br />termine "the state (of Colorado's) <br />role in the Roan Creek proposal." <br /> <br />Colorado state Sen, Don Ament <br />(chairman of their Senate Natu- <br />ral Resources Committee) has <br />been quoted as hoping the inter- <br />im commit.tee will look at the pos- <br />sibilities of keeping Colorado Riv- <br />er water in the state by <br />capit.alizing on such projects as <br />t.he Roan Creek Initiat.ive which <br /> <br />"will sell the water to Nevada for <br />a limited time until Colorado <br />needs it." <br /> <br />The Denver Post in a March 29 <br />-editorial stated: "The Roan Creek <br />Project would raise directly need- <br />ed money for education, give us <br />environmental and recreational <br />benefits. create jobs in Colorado, <br />and strengthen our legal rights to <br />t.he eventual use oflhe water that <br /> <br />we've been givin' away. . . . Drink <br />sand and die, L,A." <br />Of all the alternatives avail- <br />able to supplement. Southern Ne- <br />vada's water supply. the Roan <br />Creek proposal appears t.o be the <br />most cost-effective. It obviollSly <br />faces obstacles, but Southern Ne- <br />vada should now concent.rate on <br />how t.o overcome those obstacles. <br />It is unfortunate that discus- <br />sion of how to solve Southern Ne- <br />vada's water needs continues to <br />focus on ''Who should provide the <br />solution?" rather than "What <br />should the solution be?" <br />THOMAS CAHILL <br />Director <br />Colorado River Commission <br />of Nevada <br />Las Vegas <br />