My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01008
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01008
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:57:00 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:48:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/27/2004
Description
CWCB Director'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.
/
81
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 />Domenici on June 20, the proposed legislation would: (1) prevent enforcement of the 10th <br />Circuit Court panel decision by decreeing that habitat requirements for the silvery minnow have <br />been met based upon the March 2003 Biological Opinion issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife <br />Service; (2) legislate that the San Juan-Charna project and the Middle Rio Grande project water <br />contracts supersede the ESA; (3) limit Reclamation's use of funds to implement changes to Rio <br />Grande water contracts; (4) prohibit the use of inter-basin water transfers (San Juan-Charna <br />water) to meet ESA requirements; and, (5) allow for the federal purchase of privately held water <br />if there is a willing seller. Legislation accomplishing the latter three objectives was enacted as <br />part of Energy and Water Appropriations Act of2004 on December 1, 2003. <br /> <br />We would note that deliveries of water from the San Juan-Chama Project for the Silvery Minnow <br />would have come at the expense of two other endangered fish in the San Juan River Basin, the <br />Colorado Pikeminnow and the Razorback Sucker. Thus, the 10th Circuit Ruling not only <br />adyersely affects water users in the Rio Grande Basin, but also adversely impacts water users in <br />the San Juan River Basin of Colorado and New Mexico. <br /> <br />The State of Colorado joined an Idaho amicus urging rehearing en banc on the 10th Circuit <br />decision. On January 5, 2004 the 10'h Circuit vacated its opinion and dismissed the appeal as <br />moot stating that the legislation enacted and the improvement in climatic conditions made the <br />preliminary injunction unenforceable. However, the case remains active in District Court and <br />there could be further appeals once the District Court case is concluded. <br /> <br />In addition, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Act signed by President Bush on <br />Dec. 1 (HR 2754), contained a provision that prohibits any federal funds from being used to <br />reduce or reallocate water for the purpose of Endangered Species Act (ESA) compliance, unless <br />it is done on a willing seller or lessor basis, and in compliance with New Mexico laws. The <br />provision also provides over $34 million for the Middle Rio Grande Project. <br /> <br />The measure, crafted by New Mexico Senators Pete Domenici and Jeff Bingaman, statutorily <br />determines that silvery minnow habitat recovery requirements under the ESA have been, and <br />continue to be met through implementation ofthe reasonable and prudent alternatives outlined in <br />a March 2003 Biological Opinion. The provision also establishes a seven-member executive <br />committee and provides additional funding for the Middle Rio Grande Collaborative Program <br />Workgroup. <br /> <br />New Mexico's Approves State Water Plan: New Mexico's first comprehensive state water <br />plan was approved by its Interstate Stream Commission at a meeting on Dec. 17, in Santa Fe. <br /> <br />"This state water plan is the culmination of six months of hard work by the staff of the Interstate <br />Stream Commission and the Office ofthe State Engineer," said State Engineer John D'Antonio. <br />"This plan will provide a policy framework for the Office of the State Engineer and the Interstate <br />Stream Commission to manage water issues and prioritize funding needs around the state in <br />coming years." . <br /> <br />Governor Richardson had mandated that a comprehensiye state water plan be in place by the end <br />of December 2003. Information was gathered from public meetings in 29 communities <br />throughout the state, from July through September. Comments received from those meetings <br />were posted on the agency's web site along with the consensus report produced at the New <br />l\fexico First Town Hall Meeti~ in SeJltember._______________ _________ <br /> <br />Additional comments from the public on the draft document issued in October, along with input <br />from the Interstate Stream Commission's ad hoc committee ofregional water planners, helped to <br />improve the final document. <br /> <br />"This plan is a first look at the water issues affecting the future of our state," said Chairman of <br />the Interstate Stream Commission Jim Dunlap. "1 would ask all of our citizens to keep in mind <br />22 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.