WSP02305 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REGIONAL ECONOMY WITHOUT PROJECT water for purposes other than the intended M&I SJWC uses. For example, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service might argue it should be able to use the water for recovery of the Colorado squawfish. On the other hand, because SJWC has an existing contract for 30,800 acre-feet from the USBR, the USBR may be obligated to make that water available to SJWc. SJWC has relied upon the contract and foregone many opportunities to develop alternative water supplies. There is also concern if ALP is not constructed that the Animas-La Plata Project Compact would no longer be applicable. The Animas-La Plata Project Compact effectively places New Mexico's ALP water, and therefore SJWC's water, on equal footing with Colorado's ALP water as provided in Article I of the compact: The right to store and divert water in Colorado and New Mexico for the La Plata and Animas River systems, including return flow to the La Plata River from Animas River diversions, for uses in New Mexico under the Animas-La Plata Federal Reclamation Project shall be valid and of equal priority with those rights granted by decree of the Colorado state courts for the uses of water in Colorado for that project, providing such uses in New Mexico are within the allocation of water made to that state by articles III and XIV of the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact (63 Stat. 31). Repealing the equal priority of these rights would result in New Mexico's rights having a 1956 priority date, which would be junior to Colorado's rights having a 1938 (or senior) priority date. This is of further concern because on a relative basis, Colorado has continued with development of its water while New Mexico has been waiting for ALP. The question arises if the equitable apportionment of water between Colorado and New Mexico would be based on relative priority dates between interstate water rights holders. This may be a possibility, but a more likely scenario may be that the equitable apportionment would be based on reference to the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact, which provides for an equitable division of the water between the states. If there is still some uncertainty in the division of the water, the Upper Colorado River Commission could determine it based upon a quantification of both the pre- and post-compact uses in both states. Setting aside these two possible impediments, it is likely that New Mexico would still receive the 30,800 acre-feet. However, the question remains under this scenario as to who in New Mexico receives the water. The two possibilities are that (1) SJWC would receive 3-16