Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00" ~c"3 <br />lJO' <br /> <br />2002] <br /> <br />THE lAST GREEN lAGOON <br /> <br />925 <br /> <br />Court's decree in Arizona v. California. 131 which may be read to <br />require that water used by the tribes count against the states in <br />which the reservations are located. 132 Section II(B)(4) of the <br />decree provides: "Any mainstream water consumptively used <br />within a State shall be charged to its apportionment, regardless <br />of the purpose for which it was released.. .".133 This is of <br />particular concem to Arizona, where the Colorado River Indian <br />Tribes have rights to over 900,000 af of water. Until recently, <br />Arizona relied on ~ II(B)(4) to insist that neither California nor <br />Nevada could obtain rights to tribal water without that water <br />being counted against Califortlfa and Nevada's <br />apportionments.l34 Since Arizona has created the Arizona Water <br />Bank,135 the state has had a change of heart. Arizona now prefers <br />to rely on ~ II(B)(6), which allows the Secretary of the Interior to <br />release the unused water for consumptive use in other states <br />when a state will not consume all of its apportionment in one <br />year.136 The viability of the Arizona Water Bank, as well as the <br />potential for interstate marketing of tribal water rights, may <br />depend on resolVing the apparent collision between ~~ II(B)(4) <br />and II(B)(6) in the Supreme Court's decree. <br />These and other restrictions reveal that the circumstances <br />surrounding the Colorado River are enormously complex. The <br />Law of the River has evolved into. an incredibly rigid structure of <br />water rights and entitlements. This structure has survived <br />despite droughts, legal and political challenges, and nearly a <br />centwy of dramatic economic and social change. The inflexibility <br />of this system is also the source of growing tension, as the <br />historical context that created it is replaced by dynamic <br />contemporary conditions reflecting new needs, desires, and <br />social, environmental, arid econonllc priorities. <br /> <br />131. See Arizona, 376 U.s. 340. <br />132. See Glennon, supranote 104, at 714. <br />133. See Arizona. 376 U.S. at 343. <br />134. See Glennon; supra note 104, at 703. 705. <br />135. In 1996, the Arizona Legislature established the Arizona Water Bank in order <br />to utilize Arizona's. share of Colorado River water. See ARiz. REv. STAT. ANN. ~ 45- <br />2401-72 (West Supp. 2001). The bank will store excess water in Arizona aquifers and <br />lease excess water t-o. Nevada and. California. See Margaret Bushman LaBianca, The <br />Arizona Water Bank and the Law of the River, 40 ARIz. L. REv. 659. 671-673 (1998). <br />In July 2001, the Arizona Water Banking Authority entered into an agreement with <br />the Southern Nevada Water Authority to allow Nevada to use a portion of Arizona's <br />Colorado River allocation. See AgreementforInterstateWaterBankingSigned. AWBA <br />NEWSLETIER (Arizona Water Banking Authority. Phoenix, Ariz.), No.7, August 2001. <br />at 1 [hereinafter Agreement]. <br />136. See generally Glennon. supra note 104. <br />