Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />,,'"" <br />~1') <br />~:~,--t <br />..-l <br />;':-) <br />(~ <br /> <br />alleged debt situation mean that every year's scheduled delivery must be met. <br />Until some progress is made paying off the alleged debt, Colorado and the Valley <br />have no "breathing room." Failure to meet the requirement for just one year, <br />even for a very small amount of water and regardless of the reasons, would allow <br />Texas and New Mexico to reopen their suit. Knowledgeable sources believe that <br />what would probably come out of that action ,would be the assignment of a River <br />Master to the Rio Grande. The River Master would be responsible only for seeing <br />that the terms of the Compact were met. This would remove the administration of <br />many water-~elated issues from local control. Government management of small <br />scale, irrigation systems often does not work out very well for the local users. <br />It is in the Valley's interest to work out a system on the local level which <br />allows the Compact to be met and to avoid having a system imposed on it from <br />"above. If <br /> <br />For the short term, th~ Colorado State Engineer's office is responsible for the <br />difficult and thankless task of making sure the Compact is complied with. Like <br />most holding actions, the effort has to be undertaken piecemeal 'and year to year. <br />Almost every attempt by the State Engineer's office to regulate the flow of <br />water in the river or even to try to develop the guidelines of a system to <br />accomplish this has met vigorous resistance. The response of those who see <br />their vital interests threatened is completely reasonable. The response is <br />always, "Why me?". To which the State Engineer responds, "We have to' start <br />somewhere." To which the individual responds, "See you in court." Each <br />individual's act is reasonable and no one would argue with his right to bring <br />his own complaint before the law. The net result, however, has be'en conflict, <br />the polarization of various interest groups, and the "climate of economic' fear" <br />which was mentioned earlier. Until a system is established which will assure a <br />source of water to reliably meet the annual Compact requirement and to make <br />,progress in "paying off" the alleged debt, this situation will continue. It is <br />'" a situation which is causing the Valley real economic hardship. The hardship is <br />. not related to the quantity of water required. The hardship is the result of - <br />'il'the failure to define a system for providing the water and the uncertainty which <br />'"this has caused. Farme,rs have quite enough risks to take in the course of a <br />normal year's business. The weather; markets, the economy in general, and many <br />other things make farming a gamble under the most secure conditions. An addi- <br />tional area of uncertainty, whether or not adequate water will be available at' <br />the needed time in the growing season, has direct economic consequences. It <br />affects the decisions of individual farmers on whether or not to put a crop in <br />the field and their ability to secure the financial backing to run their busi- <br />nesses for a year. The attempts to remove that area of uncertainty by actual or <br />threatened legal action drains large amounts of money out of the Valley, too. <br /> <br />In 1966, Texas and New Mexico brought the Compact dispute to the Supreme Court. <br />Valley residents realized that the terms of the Compact might actually be <br />enforced. The need was recognized for a local organization to protect the <br />Valley'S water rights and to develop programs which would all~w the histori- <br />cally established framework of Valley agriculture to continue while still pro- <br />viding room for new economic development. At the urging of Valley residents, <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />-- <br /> <br />