My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02341
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02341
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:14:43 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:14:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/24/2006
Description
Report of the Attorney General
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.
/
7
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 />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />e <br /> <br />9. Ground Water Right for Great Sand Dunes :'IIational Park. 2004 C\" 35. <br /> <br />This mattcr has bcen re-referred to the District Cllurt and a pITliminary schcdule adopted <br />with initial disclllsurcs in April and expert dlsclosurcs in t~t11 2000. Nll trial date is set. but <br />thcrc is an additional scheduling con ference set for Noycmber, 2006. <br /> <br />10. Conseios de Desarrollo Economico de i\lexicali v. Norton. <br /> <br />On July 19,2005, C. DEM.. a Mexicali non-profit cconomic dcyclopmcnt group, tiled a <br />class-action suit against the Department of the Interior and Burcau of Reclamation. <br />challenging the project to linc the All-American Canal. The water to bc saved was <br />carmarkcd for the San Luis Rey Indian Tribcs in California. C.D.E.M. was joincd by t\\O <br />U.S. environmental groups. The complaint has eight counts: (I) unconstitutional depri\.ation <br />of Mexican water users right to use seepage from the canal: (2) constitutional tort by <br />deprivation of use of seepage water; (3) that Mexican water users are entitled to equitable <br />apportionment of the seepage water; (4) that Interior is estopped from lining the canal <br />because it has allowed development of the infrastructure and economy in Mexicali that is <br />dcpendent upon the seepage.; (5) NEPA violations; (6) Endangered Spccics Act violations; <br />(7) unlawful take of migratory bird species; and (8) violation of a provision of thc San Luis <br />Rey Settlcment Act. The plaintiffs ask that construction be enjoincd until thcrc is <br />environmental compliance. Of more importance to Colorado River watcr users. thcy ask for <br />"an order permanently enjoining and restraining Defendants ti'om contiscating or re- <br />distributing property [i.e" the seepage water] of the class." The United States and a number <br />oflowcr basin intervenors have moved to dismiss thc claims. For the time being, all the <br />Upper Basin States are staying out and simply monitoring for any indication of an attempt to <br />impact the Upper Basin. The Court has still not ruled on the motions to dismiss. and has set <br />a schedule for briefs on motions for summary judgment that extends through March. <br /> <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.