WSP08963 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I' , 1996 .Years ago, when they put us on the reservation, they said, 'You will be farmers: How do we do that without water?" - Judy Knight-Frank, ute Mountain Ute tribal chairwoman one that they thought could certainly deliver to them 60,000 acre-feet of water a year. So, wrapped in its Indian blanket, A-LP survived the late 1980s, a time when soaring costs and environmental problems felled many Bureau projects (HCN, 3/22/93). NothIng else has worked At the meeting in Arvada on Oct 9, Leonard Burch, the Southern Ute tribal chainnan, remind- ed participants of this history. "A-LP was the engine that drove the settlement of the tribal water claims 10 years ago," he said, and nothing has changed. "Without new storage facilities and development of additional water supplies" the Ute water rights can't be met The Utes won't let anyone off the hook, he said. "We do not intend to revisit what we did 10 years ago. Instead, we want to find solutions to the problems that are delaying construction of the project." The group heard the same impatient mes- sage from Judy Knight-Frank, the Ute Mountain Ute tribal chairwoman. "Years ago, when they put us on the reservation, they said, 'You will be fanners: How do we do that with- out water? They said, 'We will give you Electa Draper/Durango Herald Interior Secretary Bmce Babbitt and Lt. Gov, Gail Schoettler speak during the A-LP hearings, In the background is Maggie Fox of tbe Sierra Clnb. water.'..." That was a century ago, she said, and now, "We want our water. We want our storage for it." The two tribal leaders were part of a four- sided table. At one end sat Romer, Colorado U. Gov. Gail Schoettler, whose portfolio is con- sensus, and Babbitt. The A-LP proponents - the tribes, the Anglo fanners' Animas-La Plata Water Conservancy District and San Juan Water Commission - sat on a second side. On the third side were the environmentalists and Jim Lochhead, who runs the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, represeilting Colorado. On the fourth side was a melange: New Mexico interests, Interior attorney Joseph Sax, and the EPA. The table needed far more than four sides to represent all the interests. Bruce Babbitt alone was being pulled in three different directions: "I bring to the table the reins of three hors- es, three bureaucratic horses that are often charging off in different directions." Babbitt's steeds were the Bureau of Reclamation, which is supposed to build the dams and reservoirs; the U.s. Fish and Wildlife Service, which is supposed to enforce the Endangere.d Species Act; and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, which is supposed to get water for the Indians. Even so, Babbitt expressed optimism. He said getting stakeholders together worked years ago for the Central Arizona Project, it worked at Colorado's 1994 grazing roundtable (HCN, 4/4/94), and it resolved California's 30- year water war in the recent Bay-Delta Accords. He didn't mention the most relevant exam- ple of all: Denver's proposed Tho Forks Dam, which would have cost $1 billion, drowned a major fishery, and diverted water from western Colorado. In the early 1980s, then Gov. Ricbard Lamm convened a similar roundtable. Some environmentalists boycotted the round- table so that they could continue to fight the project Others came to the table, admitted that Denver had water needs, and looked for ways to meet the needs without a dam. In the end, President George Bush decided that Denver's needs could be met without building Tho Forks, and he vetoed the project There's a parallel in this Arvadaroom. The environmental critics of the project sitting at the table agree that the Utes should have 60,000 acre-feet per year. But they don't like I , ..I !~ 6 - C 1996 High COuntry News