Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />January 20, 2000 <br /> <br />Mr. Tim Vollmann <br />U. S. Department of the Interior <br />Office of the Solicitor <br />Regional Office, Southwest Region <br />2400 Louisiana Blvd., N.E. <br />Building One, Suite 200 <br />Albuquerque, NM 87110 <br /> <br />Re: Draft Report of the Department of the Interior's Working Group on the Endangered <br />Species Act and Indian Water Rights <br /> <br />Dear Mr. Vollmann: <br /> <br />The undersigned Western States' water management officials (hereinafter "Western States" <br />or "States") have reviewed a draft of the above-referenced report and determined the Western States <br />share some of the same concerns. Each State has developed different policies and approaches for <br />addressing Indian water issues. These individual approaches often differ dramatically from State <br />to State. This letter will not attempt to address all the States' various positions. Different positions <br />and approaches are outlined in separate comment letters submitted by various States. However, <br />despite the States' differences, there are several overriding principles upon which the undersigned <br />Western States agree. <br /> <br />First, the draft report seeks to address certain issues related to the Endangered Specjes Act <br />that cause fundamental problems for all water users, not just the Tribes. It is not clear to the <br />Western States why the Working Group did not break their recommendations into two categories: <br />one making recommendations for some fundamental changes to the Endangered Species Act and <br />a second category addressing recommendations specific to the federal trust responsibilities to the <br />Tribes. <br /> <br />Second, the draft report seeks to address issues that appear to have arisen primarily from <br />isolated examples in Arizona and New Mexico. It is not clear to the Western States why the <br />Working Group has recommended generic actions that would affect all Western States when the <br />factual basis for the draft report appears to be localized. The States appreciate the concerns of the <br />southwestern Tribes and the problems they are facing in dealing with the Endangered Species Act. <br />However, while it is not clear in the draft report, it appears there could be some adverse impacts on <br />non-Indian water users if the recommendations are implemented. This shift in responsibility to <br />meet the requirements of the Endangered Species Act is a major concern of the Western States. <br /> <br />1 <br />