Laserfiche WebLink
<br />USDI Secretary Babbitt on Colorado River Issues <br /> <br />Page 4 of6 <br /> <br />Bureau of Reclamation has been working on a cooperative arrangement with the Imperial <br />Irrigation District to determine the amount of water IID is beneficially using. This is a <br />desirable step, and I have instructed the Bureau to seek to implement it as expeditiously as <br />possible. Such collaborative and cooperative efforts are preferable to the use of regulatory <br />strictures, which is the alternative means of determining beneficial use, and which I, as well <br />as the state, have authority to implement if necessary. Once such a baseline is determined, <br />marketing opportunities will be one step closer to reality. <br /> <br />2. Second, I am instructing the Bureau of Reclamation to initiate a rule making process to <br />develop water management regulations for the Lower Basin. As you know, the Bureau <br />began such an effort several years ago, but deferred further work to allow a consensus to <br />develop among the states on approaches to interstate marketing and banking. Those efforts <br />were unsuccessful. This time, the regulations will focus on: intrastate marketing; and <br />interstate marketing within the Lower Basin based on state-approved, willing buyer/willing <br />seller transactions. The regulations may be expanded if the public scoping process identifies <br />other water management activities that could be incorporated in them, without generating <br />significant controversy or delay. <br /> <br />I want to take special note of an Arizona initiative. It has put in place a groundwater banking <br />program that will enable it to store Colorado River water offstream for future use. This <br />program, when operated in conjunction with the Arizona Groundwater Law that was enacted <br />during my tenure as Governor, will help protect Arizona against possible Colorado River <br />shortages it may have to bear. The Arizona program includes an interstate component which <br />would permit Nevada and California to store Colorado River water to help meet future needs <br />in those states. Nevada believes the Arizona plan offers real potential for it to meet its future <br />water needs, at least for a considerable time. I view this as a positive approach and I propose <br />to issue regulations that will authorize programs of this kind. <br /> <br />3. Another obstacle to marketing is the unclarity of the relative rights of various agricultural <br />agencies in California under the Seven Party Agreement of August 18, 1931, and under a <br />subsequent 1934 agreement between the Imperial Irrigation District and the Coachella <br />Valley Water District. Clarification of agricultural rights subject to the Seven Party <br />Agreement, and settlement of the long-festering dispute between Coachella and IID, are also <br />likely to be crucial to effectuating transfers in California from agricultural to urban users. <br />Such transfers would be a key component of the plan sought by the other six basin states, by <br />which California can limit its Colorado River water use. Such a plan will need to include a <br />clear and more definitive interpretation of water entitlements among the California <br />agricultural agencies. We stand ready to assist, and if necessary to assume leadership, in <br />clarifying the relative rights of the parties, as a precondition to water marketing. <br /> <br />Each of the preceding matters is an initiative that I intend to get underway beginning in the <br />next calendar year. <br /> <br />In reflecting on the controversy generated by the Seven Party Agreement, I have noted <br />striking parallels in the circumstance of several of the entities who depend on the water of <br /> <br />http://www.sci.sdsu.edu/saltonlsecr_babbitt_CoR_issues.htm <br /> <br />9/1212006 <br />