Testimony of David L. Pope - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

http : / /resourcescommittee.house.gov/ 107cong /water /2002mar 19 /pope.htm However, it does not mention the Arkansas River Compact, the pending litigation, or the state of Kansas. Neither does it provide protection to Kansas rights under the compact. The area in Kansas affected by this proposed legislation is on the High Plains, a semi -arid area where irrigated agriculture is critical to the regional economy. Kansas relies on the benefits of the conservation storage in John Martin Reservoir, some 60 miles upstream of the state line in Colorado, as provided for in the compact. The Arkansas River is essentially the only renewable water supply in Southwest Kansas, providing critical water supplies through direct diversion from the river to agriculture. It also provides significant recharge to area aquifers. The aquifers supply wells that are pumped for irrigation, industry, municipalities and other uses. Kansas uses 100 percent of the flow at the state line, basically all the time. The proposed bill places these limited water supplies in jeopardy. Basis of Opposition The proposed legislation would: (1) authorize a feasibility study of enlarging Pueblo Reservoir and Turquoise Lake, and, (2) modify the current authorization for the Frying Pan- Arkansas Project. Kansas opposes this legislation for a number of reasons. Passage has the long -term potential for adverse effects on the quantity and quality of the water Kansas receives across the state line. It would likely lead to the shifting of current uses of water from Kansas to Colorado. It provides the mechanisms for Kansas water supplies to be consumed in Colorado. As a result, new compact violations by Colorado can be expected to occur if the ultimate purposes of HR 3881 are achieved. HR 3881 would authorize new contracts, including temporary contracts for water banking, which make project storage space available for non - project water. These project modifications are referred to as "reoperation." We believe the reoperation of the project will materially deplete the flow and degrade the quality of the water flowing to Kansas. Before authorizing legislation is considered, proponents should obtain Kansas' agreement that the proposals will not materially deplete the flow or degrade the quality of water at the state line. Kansas is the downstream state. Its water supply would be jeopardized by the proposed legislation. Proponents of HR 3881 want to do whatever is feasible to maintain or improve the use of water by agriculture within the district, at the same time increasing present supplies to municipal and other users. Although the legislation does not specify the amount of storage immediately available for contract, our review of the PSOP indicates an additional 49,500 acre feet of available storage space. The historical average yield to Kansas from the Arkansas River is approximately 150,000 acre feet, although it may vary greatly. Just this portion of the PSOP increase for storage is equivalent to one third of Kansas' average water supply. The district expects to accomplish this wiih no additional imports from the Colorado River Basin. This means native water in the Arkansas River Basin which currently comes to Kansas would be the only source. Adopting the legislation would enable Colorado to reduce flows into Kansas. Kansas believes the goal is not feasible without increasing the consumptive use of water in Colorado, which takes water from Kansas. Proposed sources of storage The bill's effect would be to increase storage and intensify the use of water in the basin in Colorado to — the detriment of existing water uses in Kansas. This would be contrary to the compact and the interests of Kansas generally. The existing project authorization allows for limited storage of native water during the winter and at times when John Martin Reservoir is spilling. In addition, imported water from the Colorado River Basin or "trans- mountain" project water is stored, and certain municipal trans - mountain return flows are stored by exchange. This bill would expand the storage in the project, resulting in: 2 of 4 3/20/02 10:19 AM