|
<br />If:
<br />17;
<br />(;'.!
<br />N
<br />
<br />(.
<br />
<br />c
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />160 J. ENERGY, NAT, RESOURCES, & ENVTL. L. [Vol. 13
<br />
<br />I,
<br />It"
<br /><,
<br />
<br />and there has been little effort to cooperatively resolve the conflicts..
<br />However, as the West's population continues to mushroom,' western
<br />leaders must resolve the tenacious issue of water allocation. Scholars ~
<br />have recently proposed a variety of solutions,6 including water mar. .~
<br />kets; but none of these proposals has resolved the conflict. .1
<br />In Utah, however, one battle has peacefully ended. The solution 'I
<br />is the Central Utah Project Completion Act (CUP or CUP Completion '1
<br />Act)6_a massive political compromise, which authorizes the expendi. ~
<br />
<br />1
<br />:1
<br />,
<br />
<br />, See RICHARD W. WAHL, MARKETS FOR FEDERAL WATER: SUBSIDIES, PRoPERTY RIGHTS, AND
<br />THE BUREAU OF REcLAMATION 69--123 (1989) (stating that Representative Miller's experience
<br />with the Reclamation Reform Act of 1982, 43 U.S.C. tt 390aa to 390zz-1 (1988), is a good
<br />example of how a contentious attempt to limit the water subsidy has failed).
<br />, Many major western cities grew over 25% in the decade between 1980 and "1990. BUREAU
<br />OF THE CENSUS, U.S. DEP"r OF COMMERCE, STATE AND METRoPOLITAN AREA DATA BOOK, tabla
<br />2, at la-xxvii (4th ed. 1991). ,
<br />. There have been many water reform proposals including: redefining the legal definition of .;;l
<br />-Wute," Steven J. Shupe, Waste in Western Water Law: A Blueprint for Change, 61 OR. L. REv., -1
<br />483,492-522 (1982); water pricing and forced conservation, WAHL, supra note 4, at 128-29; and
<br />eliminating water 8ubsidies, Bob Gottlieb & Peter Wiley, Selling Water, or Selling Out', in
<br />WESTERN WATER MADE SIMPLE 28, 33-34 (Ed Marston ed" 1987),
<br />., See, e.,., U. Economist Decries Water Fights, Says Utah Must Lead with Policy, SALT LAKE
<br />TRm., Aug. 20, 1989, at 6B. .
<br />. The Central Utah Project Completion Act is contained in titles II through VI of the
<br />Reclamation Projects Authorization and Adjustment Act of 1992. Pub. L. No. 102-575, 106 Stat.
<br />4600 (1992) (providing an overhaul of California's Central Valley Project and dozens of other
<br />water projects for 17 western states). President Bush signed the bill into law on October 30,
<br />1992. Keith Schneider, Federal Law Changes California Water Policy, N.Y. TIMEs, Nov. 1,1992,
<br />p, at 39,
<br />The original Central Utah Project (original CUP) was part of the Colorado River Storage
<br />Project Act of 1956. 43 U.S.C. tt 620-6200 (1988). The original CUP was a reclamation project
<br />designed to enable the State of Utah to divert water from the Upper Colorado River Basin to
<br />the much more populated areas of central Utah. Robert W. Swenson. A Primer of Utah Water
<br />Law: Part II, 6 J. ENERGY L. & POL'Y I, 39-41 (1985) (describing the organization and some of .
<br />the problems resulting from the original CUP); Bee also infra notes 144-164 and accompanying
<br />tart.
<br />As designed, the original CUP planned for six new reservoirs; more than 200 miles of
<br />aqueducts, tunnels, and canals; one powerplant; seven pumping plants; and about 162 miles of
<br />drains and modifications to existing natural channels. Approximately 100,000 acre-
<br />feet-enough water for 400,000 additional people-would be delivered to urban areas along the
<br />Wasatch Front, and about 200,000 acre~feet would be delivered to central Utah farmers. H.R.
<br />REP. No. 114, 102d Cong., 1st Sess, 70-71 (1991), Construction on the original CUP began as
<br />early as 1966, but came to a halt in 1988 when the Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) ran out of
<br />money. David Hampshire, The CUP Runneth DueT, UTAH HOLIDAY, June 1991, at 42, 44. Faced
<br />with this problem, Utah's political leaders submitted a simple, one-paragraph bill asking
<br />Congress for $876 million to finish the job. However, the leadership of the House Interior
<br />Committee stipulated that the legislation would not move unless supported by the national
<br />environmental community. After three years of intense negotiations, familiar adversaries came
<br />
<br />I
<br />I
<br />I
<br />i
<br />I
<br />
<br />I:
<br />
<br />t:',
<br />
<br />~,
<br />
<br />l
<br />
<br />
|