|
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />Page 2
<br />
<br />2. Trout Unlimited v. U,S. Dept, of AgricuIture, C.A, No, 96-WY-2686-WD,
<br />
<br />The U,S. District Court has set this case for oral argument on April 4, 2002, at 1 :30 p.m. in
<br />Casper, Wyoming. This is the case where Trout Unlimited challenged the Forest Service's
<br />decision not to impose a condition requiring bypass flows in its renewal of the special use permit
<br />for Longdraw Reservoir.
<br />
<br />3, Forest Service Reserved Rights Cases, Case Nos, 8l-CW-220 et aI., Water Division 2,
<br />
<br />In late December of2001; after extensive consultation with many of the objectors in these
<br />cases Wendy Weiss prepared and sent to the U.S, Forest Service a letter, joined in by a number
<br />ofthe other objectors, listing the conditions the objectors would require in order to agree to a
<br />stipulated dismissal of the reserved rights claims in Division 2. The conditions were that the
<br />dismissal be "with prejudice" - meaning that the cIaims could not be re, filed - and that the
<br />United States should reimburse the costs ofthose objectors who qualify under the federal EquaI
<br />Access to Justice Act. We await a response. .
<br />
<br />4, Forest Service Reserved Rights Cases, Case Nos. W-1l46-73 et a!., Water Division 7,
<br />Nothing new to report,
<br />
<br />5, Kansas v. CoIorado, United States Supreme Court, No, 105, Original,
<br />
<br />Several issues still remain to be tried: whether Colorado was in compliance from 1997 on,
<br />and how future compliance should be determined. The states have discussed future compliance
<br />and are presently far apart on how it should be determined. We are also at odds on the proper
<br />method for calculating the damages due to Kansas for the pre,I997 period, and hence on the total
<br />amount ofthose damages. Trial before Special Master Arthur Littleworth is set to resume in .
<br />Pasadena, California, on June 10, 2002,
<br />
<br />Attorney General Salazar has been working with the Kansas AG Carla Stovall, together with
<br />DNR and Governor Owens' Office, to try once more to achieve a comprehensive settlement of
<br />the case. Last fall, the two states retained former Montana AG Joe Mazurek to serve as
<br />mediator, and obtained a stay of proceedings from the Special Master until the end of December
<br />200 I. Although our settlement efforts have so far been unsuccessful, the negotiations were very
<br />informative. We are hopeful that we can try again after all the experts' reports are complete and
<br />before the June trial. The Board may wish to discuss in executive session the issues remaining
<br />for trial and the issues addressed in the confidential settlement negotiations,
<br />
<br />6, Kansas v. Nebraska and CoIorado, United States Supreme Court, No. 126, Original.
<br />
<br />As previously reported, all three states; joined by the federal govermnent in its capacity as
<br />amicus curiae, started confidential mediation with a facilitator last fall. We were able to obtain a
<br />three,and-a,halfmonth extension in the trial schedule to pursue mediation, and meetings have
<br />been scheduled through the end of March. The Board may wish to discuss in executive session
<br />the issues addressed and the status of the confidential mediation.
<br />
<br />Unless the mediation makes enough progress to warrant further extensions of the
<br />proceedings, the Master has scheduled several crucial compact issues for briefing in April. The
<br />
|