9367 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the lack of need for the water. If your need is within limits, you will fulfill that need, but as Jim just said, we have not been able to find a need. No one is going to pay for something that they do not need. Question: This is off the subject that we have been discussing, and I realize that it points to what is been scheduled for tomorrow. However, I would like for Ms. Potter to comment. It seems to me that much of the litigation of, not only the Sierra Club, but the entire environmental community is on water projects. The net result seems to be water running out of the state and into the Lower Basin. Are there not endangered species below the Imperial Canal, or is it just coincidence that the emphasis of the Endangered Species Act seems to focus on the Upper Basin with the result that water goes to the Lower Basin? Lori Potter: I know that there are a great number of endangered species in California. Some very controversial ones were the source of the Wall Street Journal article calling for the repeal of the Act. I think that you chose to bring the debate to the use of the Act for what you might consider an improper purpose. However, I would submit that the Act, which was passed by Congress, is being used for the very purpose it was intended. That purpose is to protect the availability of a broad genetic pool, and to protect our heritage from the past for its possible use in the future. The Act is applied wherever those species are found. We naturally hear more about those species in our part of the world, but endangered fish, for example, are found throughout the Colorado River Basin. The Act applies to them and protects them equally wherever they are found. Question: I have a concern, rather than a question. We are here discussing water and the problems associated with water. It does not seem to me, by looking over the agenda, that we are addressing the fundamental problem, which creates the problems of water -- that is people. I read an article recently that said the population trend would not reach zero growth for 104 years, and by that time there would be slightly more than the double the current population. My concern is that regardless how much we address water, until we deal with population on an equal basis it is a feudal effort. I think that everyone needs to give that some thought. We can try to save pristine streams and wilderness areas, but until we solve the population problem we are not going to preserve the environment for the long term. I live on a ranch, and in my opinion, that environment is better than the one in downtown Denver. I do not think that ranch is going to be protected, or the environment is going to be protected until we can deal with the population. Lori Potter: I have to agree and would like to recall the words of Bruce..Babbitt, who, since leaving the governorship of Arizona, has taken a very radical and controversial view on this very issue. He speaks of some of the small towns created in the mining boom years, which are now virtually ghost towns. 'He speaks of them as "wretched little places that have no reason to exist." His point is that many of the locations of cities and small towns of the southwest are more 39