WSP05999 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

~ublic ~dviSOry r850ard State Waler Planning and Review Process ,''''''' .. , I NEBRASKA NATURAL RESOURCES CO....ISS.ON. 301 CENTE"'NIAL .....LL SOUTH. P,o. 1I0X 8...71. LINCOLN, HEBAASI(A 61! "'lJ~ICIPAl. RlchrdH.___ Om." DOMESTIC "-lfndGI9...d H..or......el'" GROtfflD WATER [RRIGAno,," ..........." C~. SURfACE WATUlIRRICAT10."I 0- s..u. e.lt.ou.... ._, UVESTOCk PROoucno~ JacloM.dd.. W.......... EJ\IVlRON"'E..O(TAL CLovtooolak_ Ho"'n.. I!'IDUSTlUAl..It CO_ERCIAl V.....AA<ko...... Hu..~. V,lUIUFL FISH" RECREAnON RldlardNlo," .... I.. COi'OCRESSIONAL DISTRICT E1<o><rrSdaJapltoH W.....~ 2001 COi'lGRf5SI0NA.l. DISTRICT ....'lllo...E.u1.a..U..... 3.d CONGRfSSIO"lAl. DISTRICT R.."St_vt ,~ The Honorable Robert. Kerrey Governor, State of ~ebraska State Capitol Lincoln. ~ebraska 68509 ~ JUN 03 1983 Members of the Eighty-Eighth ~ebraska Legislature First Session SCate Capitol Lincoln. ~ebraska 68509 COLORADO WATER C:"-:2:~;\.'AT:C!\~ E!").,09 . Dear Governor Kerrey and ~Ie:nbers of the Legislature: In accordance with its statutory responsibility under section 2-3287, R.$. Supp. 1982, the Public Advisory Board has reviewed the report of the ~atural Resources Commission entitled "Interstate w'ater Uses and Conflicts". The Board has also reviewed and considered the Commission's recommenda- tions on the alternatives presented in that report. We are in agreement with and endorse most of the recommendations of the Commission. The Public Advisory Board endorses efforts which promote interstate cooperation and minimize conflict. At the same time. we feel it is necessary to protect the State of ~ebraska's interest in preserving, conserving. and making the most beneficial use of its water resources. Differences of opinion between the Commission and the Public Advisory Board exist on only three alternatives. Those alternatives relate to the formation of interstate agreements or compacts on interstate streams on which no compacts currently exist (Alternative 2); pe~itting a state agency to buy water rights in another state (Alternative 9); and allowing state participation in water project construction in other states (Alternative 10). We feel our recommendations on these three alternatives meet the goals stated above. I II With respect to Alternative 2. the Board sees no reason to limit, as did the Commission. the formation of agreements and compacts to particular interstate streams. We therefore strongly support negotiation of present and future conflicts wherever and whenever they may occur. We further disagree with the Coc:::mission's rejection oi Alternatives 9 and 10. we believe that both of these alternatives would ?rovide I , ,