PUB00156 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sharing Colorado River Water: History, Public Policy and the Colorado River Compact Page 12 of 15 disadvantage of native species. Further, regulated flow destroys inner canyon beache~ and is detrimental to spawning habits of native fish. The introduction of exotic fish posed a further threat to native fish. Four species of native fish are endangered in the Colorado River Basin. A history of environmental neglect on the river and in many other areas throughout th United States signaled the need for protective measures. One such measure, the 1973 Endangered Species Act (ESA), greatly complicated Colorado River management. Ne criteria now were to be met. Harnessed to turn turbines and irrigate crops, the river nc was viewed as part of an ecosystem, its flora and fauna to be protected and preserved, Controversy thus arose whether valuing a river as a vital part of an ecosystem would interfere ifnot actually conflict with using its waters for strictly utilitarian purposes. This controversy lingers today to fuel environmental debates about the river. Who is to bear the cost of environmental protection is an unresolved issue. In a panel devoted to environmental concerns, John Leshy, solicitor, U. S. Department of the Interior, expressed concern that the costs of ESA environmental remedies is being unfairly borne by some water users. For example, Indians have been late in using thei water due to a lack of capital to develop projects. The Upper Basin states also have b( late in developing their water. They now must contend with ESA provisions that thos. who developed their water earlier avoided. Leshy questions whether it is fair that tho~ who developed their water uses after the passage of the ESA should shoulder the maje environmental cost for overall basin recovery. Not to be ignored are environmental problems in Mexico resulting from this country'~ management ofthe Colorado River. Located in Mexico, the Colorado River delta onc was lush with vegetation and wildlife. But the construction of 29 dams and numerous up-river diversion projects during the past 60 years has deprived the delta of natural water flow, with its vital supply of silt and nutrients. As a result, the delta fell victim 1 Colorado River development. Delta wetlands now persist only where fed by agricultu drainage water or from groundwater seepage. Arizona's Wellton-Mohawk Irrigation District's drainage flows now make up the primary source of water for the Cienega de Santa Clara, the delta's largest estuary. Th district began channeling its highly saline drainage into the delta in 1977 to keep flo,", from draining into the mainstem of the Colorado River and adding to the river's water quality problems. If the Yuma desalting plant were to come fully on-line, Wellton- Mohawk's drainage would be treated for release into the mainstem of the river. The Cienega de Santa Clara would then be deprived of its vital water source. The minimal Colorado River flow allocated to Mexico by the Law of the River is not sufficient to protect and preserve the delta. As a result, any preservation efforts must involve maintaining or increasing inflows, especially on a long-term basis. Officials r that this will require a cooperative hi-national effort, with basin states agreeing to an appropriate strategy, possibly involving a reduction oftheir Colorado River supplies. Reviewing the compact and its effect on the environment broadens the study of his tor Along with showing a connection between past, present and future, a study ofthe Colorado River Compact also demonstrates how human and natural history interact. This awareness deepens and enriches the meaning of history. http://ag.arizona.eduJAZWATERlarroyo/101comm.html 9/12/2006