11 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

< '" diverted from the drainage area of the Colorado River system above Lee Ferry. . . such consumptive use of water shall be part of the fifty thousand acre feet per annum apportioned to the State of Arizona by article I1(a) of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact." Arizona agreed to this language at the time the Act was passed. Furthermore, the language in the 1968 Act was referenced in the April 29, 2003 resolution of the Upper Colorado River Commission in support of terms that would allow Upper Colorado River Basin water to be used in the Lower Basin. Third, Arizona's position appears inconsistent with both the Colorado River Compact and the decree of the United States Supreme Court in Arizona v. California. A compact cannot be modified without the consent of the compacting states; and Congressional modification of a Supreme Court decree may violate separation of powers. Fourth, Arizona is attempting to insert provisions to cover a possible future agreement between it and the Navajo Nation. This vital legislation should not be sidetracked by Arizona's attempt to insert peripheral and divisive issues. For all these reasons, Arizona's requested changes must be rejected. With respect to the protections requested of New Mexico by the Southwestern Water Conservation District of Colorado (SWCD), New Mexico has consented to most of those conditions in its letter to Scott Balcomb and Rod Kuharich dated June 6, 2006. Those conditions include continued support for the San Juan River Basin Recovery Implementation Program (SJRIP) and the goals, objectives and actions presently associated with the SJRIP, including the reliance on the SJRIP to act as the "reasonable and prudent" alternative for compliance with certain provisions of the Endangered Species Act. New Mexico has also agreed to support the Long Hollow Reservoir Project located in the La Plata River Basin; to discuss potential modifications to the minimum bypass flows associated with the San Juan-Chama Project; and to continue to work through the Seven Basin States process to identify and help bring to fruition water augmentation opportunities throughout the Colorado River Basin, including weather modification. The final request of the SWCD is for a mechanism that will help to protect an equitable share water in San Juan basin for Colorado. This can be accomplished by having the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) rely fully on the SJRIP as the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative (RPA) in Section 7 consultations for water development or through a Programmatic Biological Opinion (PBO) or other similar mechanism that assures the protection of all existing water uses in both states and provides an RP A for future water development. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has stated that they do not believe a PBO is justified at this time. However, they have indicated a willingness to rely on the SJRIP in total as the RP A in Section 7 consultations. Both Colorado and New Mexico have expressed a desire to the USFWS for the conduct of a PBO, but are willing to see if the USFWS will use the SJRIP in total as the RP A for water development as was anticipated when Section 7 Principles were developed for the SJRIP and included in the SJRIP Program Documents with the consent of the USFWS. We would note for the record that the State of Colorado agreed to support the Hydrologic Determination as did the Upper Colorado River Commission (June 5, 2007 resolution) premised on these understandings. Subsequently, on May 23, 2007 Secretary