BOARD00543 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . . 7(a)(2) of the ESA [Endangered Species Act]." The district court granted preliminary injunctive relief, and ordered BOR to reduce contract deliveries from the San Juan-Chama Project and/or the Middle Rio Grande Project and/or restrict diversions consistent with an order dated April 19, 2002. Justices Seymour and Porfilio concurred, with Justice Kelly dissenting. "As the majority and dissent agree, this case turns on whether the government retains discretion under the contracts with the water users to apply the provisions ofthe...ESA." The majority concluded, "Scientific literature likens the silvery minnow to a canary in a coal mine, ...its population has steadily declined and now rests on the brink of extinction.... [T]he silvery minnow provides a measure of the vitality of the Rio Grande ecosystem, a community that can thrive only when all of its myriad components --living and non-living -- are in balance. All ofthe parties have admirably participated in sustaining the vitality of that system. In that process, BOR's discretion in operating these federal projects will more properly effect its consultation responsibilities with FWS [the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service] and its water management role. To that end, we conclude the district court properly held BOR has discretion to reduce deliveries of water under its contracts to comply with the ESA. We therefore AFFIRM." The majority's 22-page opinion reviews the contracts governing BOR's allocations of water, case law-- a trio of Ninth Circuit cases, the Reclamation Act, statutes authorizing the San Juan-Chama and Middle Rio Grande Projects, and ESA. A 3-page concurring opinion states that even ifthe "...contracts themselves do not expressly retain authority in the agency to reduce water deliveries except in the event of naturally caused water shortages [as Judge Kelly argues], under the unmistakable terms doctrine the ESA nonetheless modifies the contracts because the contracts do not affirmatively state that future legislation will not apply." Judge Kelly's 14-page dissent rebuts this and other majority holdings, point-by-point, concluding: "This case has enormous significance.... [It] is in considerable tension with Supreme Court authority...recognizing that the federal government generally must respect state [law and] water rights and lacks any inherent...right in water originating in or flowing through federal property.... Under the court's reasoning, the ESA, like Frankenstein, despite the good intentions of its creators, has become a monster." Sand Dunes National Monument: The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on the Interior has approved an appropriation totaling $11 million for the Great Sand Dunes National Park. The funding is divided into two parts, $9 million from the Fish and Wildlife Service Land Acquisition and an additional $2 million from National Park Service's Land Acquisition and State Assistance Fund. This combined funding will allow for the completion of the purchase ofthe Baca Ranch, thus completing the final piece of the Sand Dunes' transition from its current monument status into the nation's newest National Park. This $11 million appropriation is the final funding needed for the purchase of the Baca Ranch thus allowing the completion ofthe Great Sand Dunes National Park. Sen. Allard introduced legislation that established the Great Sand Dunes National Park three years ago, contingent on the purchase of the Baca Ranch. Since 2000, more than $22.5 million for the acquisition of the ranch has been secured. RGDSS Status: The Rio Grande Decision Support System (RGDSS) is in the final development phase. Most of the major elements ofRGDSS have been completed. Remaining tasks include finalizing computer modeling under both the Ground Water and Surface Water contracts; these modeling tasks are expected to be completed by the end of2003. In the past year, there have been several technical subcommittee meetil1gs with water users in the Rio 25