Laserfiche WebLink
<br />l,-, 3 !') 7 6 <br />: " ~, <br />'-'" ~ <br /> <br />Assert that the Water Supply & Storage Company, and the Cities of <br />Boulder, Greeley, and Fort Collins, must replace depletions of water from <br />South Platte basin water projects dating back to the early 1900s and <br />1920s, in order to avoid a jeopardy opinion for listed species as far <br />downstream as central Nebraska and the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers. <br /> <br />These cases all deal with the impact of existing water diversions and use on listed <br />species. The list of conflicts will continue to grow, as the Department of the <br />Interior under Secretary Lujan agreed in a settlement of federal litigation to <br />proceed with listing of some 400 additional species. <br /> <br />The Clean Water Act presents equally serious risks. While Section 101(g) of the <br />Act was intended to preserve State authority over the allocation and <br />administration of quantities of water and to protect water rights established by <br />states, other aspects of the Act have been used to undercut this protection. <br /> <br />. Water users have little hope for relief in the form of comprehensive amendments <br />to the Clean Water Act or the Endangered Species Act. There is very little doubt <br />that the environmental community has sufficient clout to stop a wholesale rewrite <br />of these Acts. Moreover, the prospect is real that changes to federal law will <br />result in an increase, not a decrease, in the scope and impact of these regulations <br />on water use and development. For those who doubt this prospect, consider the <br />following: <br /> <br />The 1990 Clean Air Act was a clear victory for the environmental <br />community during a Republican administration. <br /> <br />The current Administration budget reconCiliation proposal, passed out of <br />the House, contains an unspecified surcharge on the delivery of water <br />stored in or transported through Federal reclamation projects. The <br />purpose of this surcharge would be to generate a Natural Resources <br />Restoration Fund of at least $10 million, to be spent for the benefit of fish <br />and wildlife resources, including habitat, affected by projects already <br />constructed . <br /> <br />. Further evidence of the power of Congress to impose solutions over the <br />objections of local water users is seen from the process that lead to the passage <br />of HR 429, the Omnibus Reclamation Act. As the Central Utah Project and other <br />reclamation bills were held up, Congressman Miller and Senator Bradley <br />successfully packaged those bills with their desired reform of the Central Valley <br />Project in California. The final CVP bill, passed as a part of HR 429, contains <br />detailed environmental and market reform provisions. In the end, 800,000 acre- <br />feet per year of yield from the Project was reallocated to fish and wildlife <br />purposes, and water users and power customers will have to pay water and power <br /> <br />4 <br />