Laserfiche WebLink
<br />0'> <br />. ~.. <br /> <br />,- <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />721 State Centennial Building <br />1313 Sherman Street <br />Denver, Colorado 80203 <br />Phone: (303) 866,3441 <br /> <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />o <br /> <br />ROY ROMER, GOVERNOR <br /> <br />M~MQR~~Q!!M <br /> <br />J. William McDonald <br />Director <br />Dayid W. Walker <br />Deputy Director <br /> <br />TO: Members. CWCB <br /> <br />FROM: Bill McDonald <br /> <br />DATE: March 5, 1987 <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Agenda Item 10. March l3, 1987. Board Meeting-- <br />H.B. 1158 <br /> <br />Introduction <br /> <br />As introduced. H.B. 1158 addressed three matters: <br /> <br />(1) Fish and wildlife mitigation. <br /> <br />(2) State funding for the tribal development funds to be <br />created pursuant to the terms of the Colorado Ute <br />Indian reserved water rights final settlement <br />agreement of December 10, 1986, and <br /> <br />(3) Potential amendments to the instream flow statutes. <br /> <br />As reported out of the House Committee on Agriculture, <br />Livestock, and Natural Resources, the amendments pertaining to <br />the instream flow statutes were deleted, Therefore, this <br />memorandum covers only the tribal development funds and the <br />fish and wildlife mitigation provisions of the bill as reported <br />out (copy enclosed). Potential amendments to the instream flow <br />statutes are the subject of a separate memorandum re: Agenda <br />Item lOa. <br /> <br />Fish and Wildlife Mitiqation provisions <br /> <br />Enclosed is a summary analysis comparing the fish and <br />wildlife mitigation provisions of H.B. 1158 as introduced with <br />the bill as reported out of committee. I believe that you will <br />find this summary analysis to be self-explanatory. <br /> <br />The issue before the Board is whether to take a position on <br />this aspect of the bill. <br /> <br />2906E <br />