My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01816
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD01816
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:07:40 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
11/19/2001
Description
CF Section - Proposed Statute Revisions Construction Fund and Severance Tax Trust Fund Perpetual Base Account
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.
/
130
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 />i <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />Page 7 <br /> <br />Conservation District, and pwnped water from the low flow conveyance channel into the river. <br />The Court approved the stipulation and ordered mediation for a permanent solution to the <br />problem. We are concerned regarding any position the United Statesmay take with respect to <br />releasing San Juan-Chama water directly for instream flows. The federal law authorizing the <br />San Juan-Chama project appears to forbid releases for such purposes. Further, we are concerned <br />about our water in the Rio Grande and whether the federal government is looking to Platoro or <br />the Closed Basin Project to add to the flows for the minnow beyond our Compact delivery <br />requirements. <br /> <br />On June 29,2001, the United States issued the Programmatic Biological Opinion on the <br />Effects of Actions Associated with the u.s. Bureau of Reclamation's, u.s. Army Corps of <br />Engineers', and Non-Federal Entities' Discretionary Actions Related to Water Management on <br />the Middle Rio Grande, New Mexico ("Bi-Op"). <br /> <br />The Bi-Op analyzes the effects on the listed species (silvery minnow and Southwestern <br />fly catcher) from existing depletions to the Rio Grande that result from both Indian and non- <br />Indian water uses within the action area, and extends incidental take coverage to those uses. <br />Regarding the San Juan-Chama project ("SJC"), it appears that the Bi-Op does not call for <br />changes either to the Compact or to the governing rules and regulations of the SJC project, nor <br />does it call for any significant changes to existing uses of SJC water. <br /> <br />The Bi-Op also gives New Mexico water users incidental take protection. In exchange <br />fot this, New Mexico and the United States entered into a settlement where the U.S. would rent <br />water from NewMexico for three years to maintain flows in the Rio Grande. New Mexico must <br />then use those funds in programs designed to restore the endangered species. Based on the Bi- <br />,Opand this agreement, the U.S. and New Mexico'thenmoved the District Court to dismiss the <br />complaint as moot. The envirolimental groups opposed this and moved to amend their complaint <br />to add a claim that the Bi-Op was arbitrary and capricious. <br /> <br />The Court allowed the enviromnental groups to amend their complaint, did not dismiss <br />the action as moot and made comments to the effect that, had the Bi-Op not been issued when it <br />was, he would have found for the plaintiffs. The Court also stated that in his view all Corps of <br />Engineer and Bureau ofRec1amation actions are discretionary and the federal agencies may <br />disregard contracts or compacts. The Court requested briefing on this issue and the issue of <br />whether the litigants can "go behind" the Bi-Op and challenge the agency conclusions. The <br />Court denied the State of Colorado's motion for amicus status and declined to accept <br />Colorado's amicus brief joining the State of New Mexico's Brief on these issues. The Court <br />has scheduled a hearing on the substantive issues for November 19, in Albuquerque. <br /> <br />12. Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District v, Norton, CIV. 99-870, 99-872, 99- <br />1445M1RLP (Consolidated), NM Federal District Court. <br /> <br />Issue: Whether the rule designating critical habitat for the silvery minnow is valid. The <br />U.S. District Court determined that the rule is invalid. However, the rule was to remain in <br />e operation for 120 days, in which time the Secretary may issue another rule designating habitat. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.