Testimony of Congressman Jerry Moran

Home Browse Search

a y • Rep. Jerry Moran page 2 History of Arkansas River Water Use Because of its significance to economic development, water use in the Arkansas basin has long been controversial. The waters of the Arkansas River are the only renewable source of waters and have tremendous significance to Southwest Kansas. The scarce river flows provide water for the development of municipalities, large and small. The river provides recreation opportunities for tourism. Business and manufacturing depend on Arkansas water for the existence of commerce on the High Plains. Agriculture relies on the water to irrigate one of the highest- volume farming regions of the country. Rights to use the water from the Arkansas River are vested and some of the oldest in the state of Kansas. The first compact regulating Arkansas River water was negotiated over 50 years ago. Since 1950, Kansas and Colorado have had agreements about who can use how much water. The current compact was reached after interpretation from the courts through a series of lawsuits. r After spending more than a century fighting over these waters, Kansas and Colorado finally seem to have reached a court- imposed compromise. State Disputes Involve Legal Action and Lead to Lengthy Court Debates Kansas sued Colorado in 1901, 1928, and 1985 over the use of the river's water. The latest subject of dispute regarding this river was the issue of Colorado wells and the resulting flow at the Kansas state line. The last court case stemmed from Colorado pumping activity dating back to 1968. This case was litigated for nearly ten years and ultimately was heard by the Supreme Court. In a ruling last June, the Supreme Court declared that Colorado owed Kansas millions of dollars for loss of water. Over 15 years after the case was initiated, the dispute finally entered into the remedy phase. A special master was appointed in September, 2001, to work with both states to find a way to avoid future disputes over the amount of water crossing the state line. A dollar amount for the settlement has yet to be determined, but the most conservative estimates indicate that Colorado will pay Kansas about $22 million for money the state and our farmers lost over the thirty-year period. In addition to these costs and the strain on human resources, suits create an enormous burden of litigation fees for states to bear. In the last court case alone, Kansas spent over $17 million. Colorado paid an estimated $11 million in legal expenses. Potential Consequences of Legislation Affecting the Water Compact The legislation before the committee today has caused great concern for Kansas as the primary downstream state. This legislation has the potential to damage Kansas areas that depend on Arkansas River water.