Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />t <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />(fO'06 4 2 <br />. '.' '. <br /> <br />of Las Vegas, whose population by then would most likely give the city <br />controlling power of the Nevada Legislature; (3) drastic controls on <br />additional growth of Las Vegas, (4) revision of the Colorado River Compact <br />so that Nevada's apportionment is increased, (5) pressure for interstate <br />sale of water to Nevada by Upper Division states such as Utah, Wyoming <br />and/or Colorado, whose political leadership might be receptive to such a <br />concept (for a price) at that time. <br /> <br />In conclusion, we suggest that this Proposed Rule is premature, needs to be <br />reworked and a comprehensive EIS is needed. We thank you again for this <br />opportunity to provide you with these comments. <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />Steve Glazer <br />Sierra Club <br />Colorado River Task Force, Chair <br />Southwest Regional Conservati'lll Committee, Chair <br />P. O. Box 459 <br />Crested Butte, CO 81224 <br />