My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03203
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03203
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:49:09 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:36:32 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8021
Description
Section D General Correspondence - Western States Water Council
State
CO
Basin
Statewide
Date
2/10/1995
Author
Western States Water
Title
Western States Water 1995 - Issues 1082-1121
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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 /> <br />WESTERN <br />STATES <br />WATER <br /> <br />June 9. 1995 <br />Issue No. 1099 <br /> <br />o <br /> <br />recycled paper <br />conserves water <br /> <br />THE WEEKLY NEWSLETTER OF THE WESTERN STATES WATER COUNCIL <br /> <br />" , <br />Creekview Plaza Suite A~201 /942 East 7145 S~. (Mi4V1!le,JJtah 84047 / (80!) 561'5300 /FAX (801) 255:9642 <br />..~... - - ,- - - - -' . - <br /> <br />Chairman - Larry Anderson; Executive Ditector - Craig Bell; Editor - Craig Bell; Typist - Alona BarikS ' <br /> <br />ADMINISTRA TION/CONGRESSIONAL UPDATE <br /> <br />Spending CutsNeto <br /> <br />President Clinton, on June 7th, exercised his first veto <br />by rejecting a $16,5 billion spending cuts package. <br />According to reports, Republicans will not attempt to <br />override the veto, but rather will construct a new <br />e:ackage of cuts with some modest changes. The <br />resident objected to the extent of the cuts to education <br />and other social programs. Among other things, the <br />vetoed legislation would have cut $1.3 billion in unused <br />FY94 and FY95 revolving 10anJunds under the Safe <br />Drinking Water Act (yVSW #1 Og7j; However, the money <br />remains unavailable, as Congress appropriated the <br />funds subject to a pending bill authorizating spending. <br /> <br />ENVIRONMENT <br /> <br />Instream Flows-Western State Developments, <br /> <br />Montana's House of Represen,tatives has passed an <br />instream flow bill (H.B.472)Which thl:! Senate'~ !':latural <br />Resources Committeehiiis alsO approved: The bill <br />authorizes a holder of ariappropriated, consumptive use <br />water right to obtain a temporary authorization to lease <br />all or a portion of such right to an individual, association, <br />partnership or corporation for instream flows to benefit <br />fisheries. While the legislation requires compliance with <br />all current water right processes, it allows only the owner <br />to seek to enforce the temporary change authoriZation or <br />to object to other temporary change requests. An <br />objection by any appropriatior may be made during the <br />~mporary change application renewal process and Once <br />.uring the term of the temporary change permit. This <br />legislation would allow for the testing of leasing feasibility <br />and would automatically sunset in ten years. <br /> <br />Ora901'1 has now issued formal rules for instream flow <br /> <br />" lease agreements: Qregon's experience with instream <br />, flow protection can be traced back,to 1929, when flows <br />wera'reserved in ihe Columbia River Gorge to protect <br />scenic falls. After water rights for instream flows were <br />authorized in 1987, a few informal agreements for <br />. temporary leases were approved by the Oregon Water <br />Resources Department (OWRD).,To further facilitate <br />such leases, formal rules were"drafted in 1993" <br />subjected to extensive public Gomment, and finalized in <br />February 1995. In April,theOWRD,released an <br />information guide to "Short'Term Water Right Lease <br />Agreements". "Short-term" means that the lease cannot <br />. exceed two years. The first lease agreements under the <br />rules are now under review. <br /> <br />, The Oregon rules require that the applicant must <br />document flow rate, lease price, prior use of the water, <br />and commit to non-use for the term of the lease. <br />Irrigation districts may pool water rights internally. <br />Optional 'lease provisions may' relate to additional <br />monitoring requirements, modifications or termination of <br />the_lease. A '21 ~day, period .i.s al!o\\'ed for objectio!'!s from <br />other. water rights' holders,' which may lead to <br />, modification or cancellation Qf p'roposed leases. Since <br />instream' flows Constitute a beneficial use under Oregon <br />law, irrigators facingforfeiture dueio non,use haVe an <br />incentive to enter lease agreements. ' <br /> <br />The May/June issue of the Journa/ of Water. <br />Resources Planning and Management includes an <br />article by Berton Lee Lamb entitled, "Criteria for <br />Evaluating' Instream-Flow Programs: Deciding What <br />Works." It describes the history and resuJts of various <br />instreamflow programs throughout the West. The <br />author suggests five criteria to evaluate "these unique <br />state water-management institutions." Reprint copies <br />are available free of charge from the author, Burton Lee <br />Lamb, political scientist, with the National Biological <br />Services, at (970) 226-9314. The Journal will accept <br />and publish comments on the article until November. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.