Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />BIOLOGICAL OPINION <br /> <br />Proposed Action <br /> <br />· California water uses from Lake Havasu totaling 1.2 maf. <br /> <br />· Arizona water uses from Lake Havasu via the Central Arizona Project totaling 1.5 <br />maf (addressed in previous consultations). <br /> <br />· Power to California and Arizona from Parker Dam. <br /> <br />· Municipal and irrigation water to California users between Parker Dam and the <br />Northerly International Boundary (NIB) totaling 3.9 maf. <br /> <br />· Municipal and irrigation water uses to Arizona users between Parker Dam and the <br />SIB totaling 1.3 maf. <br /> <br />· Mexico water uses of 1.5 maf. <br /> <br />Management of Colorado River water resources is a complex undertaking involving physical, <br />biological, socioeconomic, and legal considerations. Management of the river is governed by an <br />international treaty with Mexico and several official Minutes of meetings of the International <br />Boundary and Water Commission (IBWC), two major interstate compacts, a Decree of the U.S. <br />Supreme Court, various statutes, and contracts between the United States and water and power <br />customers. These collectively are known as the "Law of the River" (Table 2). Reclamation serves <br />as custodian for the Secretary of the Interior (Secretary) in his role as the Watermaster. <br />Reclamation is obligated to deliver, when available, at least 9.0 maf of water annually to the lower <br />basin states and Mexico. As Watermaster, the Secretary's three operational priorities are: 1) river <br />regulation, improvement of navigation, and flood control, 2) irrigation and domestic uses, <br />including the satisfaction of present perfected water rights, and 3) power generation. Through <br />Article II of the 1964 U.S. Supreme Court Decree in Arizona vs. California, the United States and <br />its officers, attorneys, agents, and employees are enjoined from operating its LCR facilities for <br />purposes other than these three priorities. (Detailed descriptions of these facilities and related <br />structures are provided in Appendix D of the BA.) Reclamation's routine operation and <br />maintenance activities necessary to meet these requirements, and its discretion in carrying out these <br />activities, are covered by this consultation. <br /> <br />In Table 1, at the end of this section, Reclamation acknowledges that in seven instances, it has <br />"limited discretion" over certain operations and maintenance activities. What the precise <br />limitations are, what agencies or groups have the remaining discretion, and how that discretion is <br />exercised, remains unclear. The Service received a memorandum from the LCR Regional Director <br />of Reclamation dated February 4, 1997. This memorandum clarified that "for all practical <br />purposes and to all measurable effects" Reclamation l,acks discretion over the management of <br /> <br />8 <br />