My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP07317
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
7001-8000
>
WSP07317
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:26:46 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 2:15:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8210.140.20
Description
Colorado River Basin Organizations and Entities - Colorado River Basin States Forum - California
State
CA
Basin
Western Slope
Date
1/1/1971
Author
Myron B Holburt
Title
Annual Report for the Calendar Year 1970
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />IJ <br /> <br />1\ <br />I <br />I <br />~ <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />report wa;Lcif ia'iticular interest to the Colo- <br />rado River Board because of its inclusion of <br />the Colorado River as a premium scenic fish- <br />ery, wildlife, and recreational waterw~y, <br /> <br />Both the Colorado River Board and the <br />LCRCG reviewed the draft report and pre- <br />sented comments and recommendations to <br />the special Resources Agency staff. The <br />Board's major recommendations are summa- <br />rized as follows: <br />I. The California Protected Waterways Plan should <br />recognize that the Colorado River is both an inter- <br />state and an international river and is subject to <br />federal control. Various federal statutes, interstate <br />compacts, Supreme Court decisions, and the Mexi- <br />can Water Treaty control the operation of the riv- <br />er. <br />2. Because the draft report was prepared before the <br />LCRCG's final report was adopted as state policy <br />and released, it did not reflect that official expres- <br />sion of state policy. This statement of policy pro- <br />vided one of the strongest declarations of state pol- <br />icy and interest for any waterway in California. <br /> <br />\ <br /> <br />r <br /> <br />The Protected Waterways Program should be coor- <br />dinated through the LCRCG, particularly in rela- <br />tion to the Lower Colorado River Management <br />Program of the U. S. Bureau of Reclamation. <br />3. The plan should recognize that the Colorado River <br />provides a supplemental source of water and power <br />to over 10,000,000 people and 700,000 acres of irri- <br />gated land in Southern California. <br />4. The draft report contained the statement: "Coordi- <br />nation of the Federal Wild and Scenic Rivers Act <br />and interstate compacts with relation to the Colo- <br />rado River and Lake Tahoe should be required." It <br />was recommended that the statement be deleted <br />because it is vague and 3 source of controversy. <br />5. The draft report should recognize that the Colo- <br />rado River will have different classifications for <br />different reaches and that only a portion of the <br />Colorado River could be classified as a premium <br />scenic, fishery. wildlife, and recreational water- <br />way. <br /> <br />At the close of 1970, the draft report was <br />being revised for submission of the "initial <br />elements" ofthe California Protected Water- <br />ways Plan to the Legislature in early 1971. <br /> <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.