WSP09853 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

003115 In the event that the Secretary shall. . . plan works to import water into the Colorado River system from sources outside the natural drainage areas of the system, he shall make provision for adequate and equitable protection of the interests of the States and areas of origin, including assistance from funds specified in this Act to the end that water supplies may be available for use in such states and areas of origin adequate to satisfy their ultimate require- ments at prices to users not adversely affected by the exportation of water to the Colorado River system." The intent was to create a fund that could be used to provide water to future users in exporting areas at a reasonable cost." Colorado has taken an approach that requires a form of compen- sation for certain transbasin diversions. A 1943 Colorado law requires the diversion facilities for conservancy district projects taking water out of the Colorado River basin to incorporate features that will pro- tect present and future consumptive water uses in that basin, and that will not increase the cost of that water.46 The practical effect of this provision has been to cause the importing conservancy district to build additional storage reservoirs on the West Slope to provide "compensa- tory storage" for use in that area.47 Because of legislation passed by the rural-dominated New York State Legislature limiting the ability of New York City to take land in upstate counties for its water system unless full compensation is paid, the city enacted a provision governing its approach in such matters.4' According to Sax: In New York the cost of diversion is made even greater by a statu- tory provision which, in addition to allowing compensation to the owners of riparian land, requires that the owner of any real estate taken by the city which has been directly or indirectly decreased in value by the execution of any plans for additional water supply by the city shall have the right to recover damages for such decrease in value. This provision guarantees compensation to nonriparians who have made use of the river, as well as to business and property owners whose values are diminished simply by the fact that the use of the ri ver is affected 49 44. Colorado River Basin Projecl Act. 43 u.s.c. 9 1513(a) (1982). 45. Apparently, the Development Fund was. never adequately financed. See Legal SlUdy No.7. supra note I, al 104. Moreover. plan~ 10 bring water from the Pacific Northwest into the Colorado River Basin have been postponed indefimtely. 46. COLO. REV. STAT. ! 37-4S-118(b)(1V) (1973). 47. MacDonnell, Howe, Corbridge & Ahrens, Guidelines/or Area a/Origin Compel/satioll. Uni. versity of Colorado. Natural Resources Law Center Research Report 22.36 (Dec. 1985). 48. Administrative Code of the City of New York, KS 1.44.0. 49. J. SAX, WATER LAW. PI.,\NNING AND POI'/cY 200 (1968).