WSP11177 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

exemptiog small hydroelectric projects from the FERC licensing process where States have regulatory regimes in place which recognize and protect legitimate Federal interests, Although I have received no formal request to do so, I intend to hold a hearing within the next month or so on S, 106. The Western States Water Council should consider itself invited to testify. I think it is important to explore this question with an open mind. I doubt that anything can be resolved if the advocates for State or Federal control fail to acknowledge the other side's legitimate prerogatives. Approaching the matter of hydroelectric licensing from a rigid ideological perspective is sure to produce stalemate -- a situation in which, frankly, I think you have the most to lose. As to Senator Craig's bill, I am not persuaded that S. 106 offers adequate protection for legitimate Federal interests. AccordingIy, I am not able to support S. 106 at this time and have no choice but to oppose adoption of its text as an amendment to S. 341. I do, however, commit myself to working with Senator Craig and any party who is prepared to seek a balanced resolution of this important problem, I hope that we will be able to work together. I would like to turn to another topic in which I expect you have an interest: Reclamation reform. I introduced S. 2659 last year and am pursuing RRA reform in this Congress because, as implemented, the RRA has not ended the practices by which some of the Nation's biggest farm operators avoid paying their fair share for the Bureau of Reclamation's water. As Chairman of the Water and Power Subcommittee, it is my responsibility to protect the integrity of the Reclamation program and to ensure that the public's interest is honored. I am deeply concerned that the central social purpose and justification for the Reclamation program is bleeding away through loopholes. I am convinced that it is in your interest, as well, to close those loopholes. The Western States Water Council should support reform legislation which unambiguously affirms that Reclamation subsidies should be available only to farms and farm operations smaller than 960 acres. The Reclamation program provides signilicant benefits to the West. Looking ahead, one can easily foresee that your States will need a healthy, invigorated, and secure Bureau of Reclamation in the future every bit as much as in the past. Yet the future of the Bureau of Reclamation and the Reclamation program are profoundly threatened by the widespread and, in many rcspects, entirely legitimate perception that the Bureau's program is being taken advantage of by large landowners and farm operators to secure taxpayer. provided benefits intended for smaller farms. These practices pose substantial risks for the Reclamation program and its present and potential beneficiaries. They undermine the Bureau's credibility here and around the Nation, The chicanery hurts more than one State, more than one project. ft tarnishes every facet of the Reclamation program, no mailer how important, no matter how far above reproach. I recognize that those who are abusing the program represent a tiny fraction of the growers who are served by the Reclamation program westwide. Maybe two or three hundred out of over 130,000. Given this fact, it is all the more puzzling why the western water community often behaves as if the interests of those few growers are coextensive with the interests of all Reclamation project beneficiaries. It is a long western tradition to circle the wagons, but generally the idea is to bring the wagons together with the enemy on the outside, not the inside of the circle. I encourage you to think about how the water community has arranged its wagons on this issue. 2