WSP05164 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

ApPENDIX 1 ISSUES THAT INVOLVE THE INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK OF BASIN MANAGEMENT HAL SIMPSON DIVISION OF WATE:R RESOURCES DENVER, CO Long term drought response. Improving data quality. ROBERT WALSH BUREAU OF RECLAMATION; LOWER COLORADO REGION BOULDER CITY, NY From my perspective, most of the other issues (hydro pric- ing, irrigation economics, population growth, etc.) come under this umbrella. It is necessary. to look at all these other issues, see what is likely to occur, of maybe what needs to occur, then develop an institutional framework that can be responsive to the other issues in whole or in part to best (efficiency., cost-effectively., and in public inter- est) put needs in next few decades. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION MEETING BOULDER CITY, NV Public involvement is becoming a bigger requirement and demand. There really. isn't a mechanism for it other than NEPA. Colorado River Workgroup is this kind of thing. Need for effective processes for broad public involvement or way.s of involving the public in decision making processes. Demand for public inclusion in decisions on policy. regard- ing water and power delivery contracts. STEVE KREST FARMINGTON, NM Public involvement, while more time consuming, allows new ideas to enter the decision arena. SCOTT B. McELROY GREENE, MEYER, & McELROY BOULDER,CO There clearly. is a need for additional public involvement in many. of the decision making processes. The question is how to facilitate such involvement in a way. that is afford- able to tribes, small irrigation districts, and grass roots environmental organizations. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING DENVER, CO There is a need to clarify the "terms of engagement II for this project so that people understand how this project relates to their day. to day. activities. This is a key. ingredient in all stakeholder processes. There is a need to clearly. define what is expected of people in the way. of participation or contribution before they. come to the table, . Doing things differently. with water than we've done in the past, e.g., Coachella using Colorado River water to recharge an overdrafted aquifer. How do we address that to be sure stakeholders are involved? It may make sense to some peo- ple but it may. not to others. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING ONTARIO, CA Issue of public participation involves new rules and regu- lations for river management. The issue of expanded roles for public input to address environmental concerns. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING ROCK SPRINGS, WY That should be the definition of stakeholder. Those who pay. have a stake. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING PHOEN IX, AZ Future approaches to the management issues should be based on open discussions and consensus by a variety of interests. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING YUMA,AZ Overall impression is there should be separation within issue involving public involvement (#5). Isn't the appro- priate public already. involved. rhere~ too much permis- siveness in letting anybody. get involved. I wouldn't want to hang it all on environmentalists, but they're disruptive and stir things up. Do we need so much public input? Everybody. doesn't have an equal say in this. REGIONAL STAKEHOLDER MEETING SALT LAKE CITY, UT Add: Implications of public trust doctrine. To what extent is there a public out there that water needs to be managed for and who is the public? How do we know when we have adequate public involvement to protect the public? Huge one with managers and decision makers. PHILLIP WOODS EPA, REGION 9 SAN FRANCISCO,. CA No specific comment DUANE L. SHROUFE AZ GAME AND FISH DEPARTMENT PHOENIX, AZ Issues involving the demand for public involvement is decision processes are clearly priorities reflected in my prioritization. Public participation in the NEPA process is essential, and is crucial to the spirit of the law. It seems plausible that other federal laws, perhaps the Endangered Species Act, may soon focus more on the NEPA model to include broader public participation.