My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00017
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00017
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:42:36 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:30:47 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/13/1998
Description
Colorado River Basin Issues - Colorado River Commissioner's Report
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Memo
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />. .' <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Contrary to the Commissioner's testimony, S.I771 adopts the Phase 1 Stage A phasing which <br />was created by the United States after the Reasonable and Prudent Alternative under the <br />Endangered Species Act was developed in 1991. <br /> <br />Thus, S.1771 adopts depletion restrictions of 57, 100 afper year. The 1996 environmental <br />description analyzed in great detail the impacts that would likely be associated with the use <br />of these supplies and the additional 100,000 af of depletions which the project was ultimately <br />authorized to develop. <br /> <br />S.I771 also proposes a pumping plant, conduit and reservoir which were described in the <br />1996 documentation and which were specifically permitted to be constructed under the 1991 <br />ESA opinion. <br /> <br />Indeed, the only difference between the extensive environmental documentation and S.1771 <br />is that the depletions are assigned to different parties and approximately 6,000 af of the <br />depletions are assigned for future agricultural use if facilities and environmental standards <br />permit. <br /> <br />5. <br /> <br />Contrary to the suggestion of Commissioner Martinez, no new definite Plan Report is <br />required to implement S.1771 <br /> <br />Proof that The United States speaks with forked tongue lies in comparing the <br />Commissioners's opening wish set forth in his comments to provide wet water to the Tribes <br />on one hand with his later suggestion that a new definite plan report will be needed "to <br />address" $.1771. To the contrary, S.1771 is precisely designed to stop all delay and all new <br />studies. It adopts Stage A of the existing environmental and ESA documentation and <br />proposes a partial repayment plan in light of the reduced water supplies and in light of the <br />unconscionable delays largely caused by Administration opposition. While the Administration <br />can raise concerns about the federal financial obligation (caused largely by delay and two <br />decades of environmental study), it can not in good faith plead for more study and delay. <br /> <br />S.I771 was proposed by the two Colorado Ute Tribes over a year ago. The Administration <br />has had ample opportunity to ask questions and get answers. It knows well the <br />straightforward compromise set forth in S.1771. No more studies and no more delay can <br />serve any constructive purpose. As Senator Inouye suggested at the June 24th hearing, it is <br />now time to vote. <br /> <br />3 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.