WSP00170 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

WATER AND POLITICS c."J lestern Colorado has always been faced with a political reali- ty, that of being outgunned 10 to 1 in the state legislature. Political strength seems to rest with the more populated areas of the state. and 80 percent of the state's population is on the East Slope. (80 percent of the water is on the West Slope.) The River District has always maintained close communication and working relationship with West Slope legislators. which helps to equalize an underdog status involving water legislation that could either benefit or be a detriment to West Slope interests. Historically. the District has taken a careful look at legislation. not only at the state level but at the federal level as well. Some water bills brought before the Colorado Legislature and U.S. Congress have been supported, some opposed and many simply passed over when appropriate. On numerous occasions representatives of the River District have made the record in Washington. D.C. in defense of Colorado water projects and other important issues affecting the state's ability to utilize its water. Each time it was a matter of working hand-in-hand with members of the Colorado congressional delega- tion and top state officials. In 1979. as just one example. the District worked closely with Colorado's Governor and the state's representatives in Washington in an all-out effort to alter President Jimmy Carter's hit list of western water projects. River District personnel, along with state officials, appeared before the subcommittees of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. Their efforts in sell- ing Congress and the White House on the merits of certain federal projects in the state was moderately successful and necessary at that point in time. Looking back a few years. and during the presidency and per- sonal involvement of A. Allen Brown, the River District was ac- tive in the political arena in lobbying heavily for Congressman Wayne Aspinall's version of the Colorado River Storage Project Act legislation (196B). (President Brown was personally involved, through the 13 ....:..~ ~'"" I -,., District, to some degree in virtually all major water projects in Western Colorado: Curecanti, Ruedi, Paonia and Crawford reser- voirs, Dallas Creek, etc.) The '68 Act authorized simultaneous construction of five Western Colorado water storage projects with the Central Arizona Project (CAP). Three of the projects were within the River District boundaries - Dallas Creek, West Divide, and Savory Pothook. The others, Animas LaPlata and Dolores. were in Southwestern Colorado. At the time, it seemed reasonable and advantageous to accept an arrangement whereby the Colorado projects would be federal- ly funded and constructed no later than the date of the first delivery of water to Phoenix and Tuscon, but it hasn.t worked out that way. The CAP began delivering water to the Phoenix area in November of 1985 and is expected to serve Tuscon by 1991. Of the five participating projects, Dolores and Dallas Creek are nearing completion. controversy surrounds Animas-LaPlata, and con- struction starts of West Divide and San Miguel are not certain. The River District board still maintains an interest in seeing that all five projects promised under the 1968 act will someday be built. The politics of water is considered sufficiently important that, today, it is the responsibility of a special River District commit- tee, the Congressional and Legislative Affairs Committee. So the District has in the past and will continue to play a very ag- gressive role in both Denver and Washington on behalf of West Slope water users.