recent water projects, but these are usually second and third priorities. 

 And if you look at them, they are just the bare minimum at best. Again 

 the real problem is the present lack of consideration for the needs of the 

 general public in the allocation of water. 



Now the solution to this problem is not going to be easy. It's going 

 lo require the inception of a totally new philosophy of western water 

 allocation with a framework along the following lines. These are just a few 

 points that I've jotted down. I'm sure there's other things that could be 

 added. One of the most important--fish, wildife and recreation and the 

 intrinsic value natural waterways--has to be recognized as beneficial use 

 on par with the other legitimate uses of water. Nothing more or nothing 

 less, but a legitimate water use. States must dedicate themselves to 

 maintain present levels of fish, wildlife and riparian habitat. Now this is 

 important. I think states have to adopt the policy and recognize the fact 

 that if we want these resources we have to dedicate ourselves to 

 maintaining some level. We've lost enough in the past. If we want to 

 maintain what we have now, let's put it in writing and say that's what 

 we're going to do. That doesn't have to stifle development. There are 

 alternatives but if that's brought out in front of the people that this is 

 what we want to provide, we can talk about the tradeoffs, and those 

 tradeoffs are available. Another thing, I think we all recognize we're in 

 the water crisis now and the water supplies are going to tighten more. We 

 need firm direction in determining future water development and allocation 

 needs. And this is going to require formulation of comprehensive, 

 statewide water plans, generated through real public involvement. And 

 this, I think, brings us to what Dr. Wambach was talking about. Forming 

 these coalitions. Everybody should be involved in these things. 

 Developing a state water plan/water framework, but right now it's the 

 special interests developing those plans and maybe the public gets some 

 token comment. It's the public's water. The public should be leading 

 those efforts. Okay. 



Finally, the new framework must provide solid protection for all 

 existing water rights. I've been talking from a biased wildlife standpoint. 

 But those water rights, they're property rights now. They were 

 legitimately required under the current laws and they need to be 

 protected. Likewise, any future water framework for any western state 

 has to provide for other consumptive uses. Municipalities, agriculture, 

 industry, along with these nonconsumptive uses I'm talking about. The 

 biggest single factor is the public benefits. The general public benefits, 

 including nonconsumptive uses, have to receive top priority in future 

 water allocations. Water is a public resource. Why is the public left out 

 of the decision making process when their water is given away? Why are 

 public benefits given low priority and in some case not even recognized as 

 beneficial uses? These questions must be asked in the issues presented to 

 the people. As it stands now, people are unaware of our water laws. 

 They are unaware of the situation. They don't know what is going to 

 happen in the future with water laws. The water is disappearing and they 

 don't know that they have to do something to change this situation. 



be doi 



Now I guess this brings us to the theme of the meeting. What has to 

 one? The people have to be made aware of the issues and I feel that 



