|
<br />
<br />
<br />'. ,';:: ".:-
<br />
<br />4
<br />j
<br />
<br />
<br />- -.". ~
<br />
<br />C),:,--CJ'i-C(O
<br />ANIMAS CHRONOLOGY
<br />
<br />9A
<br />
<br />.
<br />
<br />-
<br />--
<br />
<br />~-, ~'~ ,. .
<br />
<br />'. .1904 - The first official study by the U.S. Reclamation Service on a plan to
<br />store water from the Animas River and use it for agriculture.
<br />.1915,1917 and 1924 - Periodic updates are done on the initial plans, one of
<br />, , which called for a rasarvoir 3 miles north of Durango and diverting water through a
<br />38-mile canal to a reservoir on La Plata River near the New Mexico border.
<br />.1938 - U.S. Bureau of Reclamation opens an office in Durango to study the
<br />project. It remains today.
<br />.1956 - Congress, through the Colorado River Storage Act, authorizes a feasi-
<br />bility study of the Animas-La Plata project.
<br />': . 1962 - The bureau finds the project to be "engineeringly sound and financially
<br />sound and feasible." The next year, it recommends to Congress that the project
<br />be authorized with a $102 million price tag.
<br />.1988 - Congress authorizes the project, consisting of Howardsville reservoir
<br />near Silverton, Hay Gulch reservoir 25 miles west of Durango, Animas Mountain
<br />reservoir to service Durango, Meadows reservoir, 48 miles of canals and tunnels.
<br />and a diversion of the Animas River at Taft, halfway between Silverton and Duran-
<br />; go. This grandiose engineering scheme, a supporter said years later, "would have
<br />, f" f>een an environmental dIsaster."
<br />; .1973 - Congress appropriates funds for advance studies.
<br />: ,.1974--77 - Advisory team of state, federal and local officials considers about 30
<br />anemate plans for the project.
<br />., -' . January 1979 - A group to be known as Taxpayers for the Animas-la Plata
<br />'1 Referendum, or TAR, organizes to fight formetion of a taxing district without an
<br />, election and to kill the project itself.
<br />, ' . September 1979 - The definitive plan report, detailing the project's new con-
<br />'I figuration of Ridges Basin and Southern Ute reservoirs, IS released by the Interior
<br />Department.
<br />--~) . July 1980 - The final environmental impact statement addresses the project.
<br />';' ';1- June 1981 - District judge orders the formation of the Animas-La Plata Water
<br />" !'.' Conservancy District, deciding along legal battle by project opponent TAR over
<br />,;,'. whether to have the question of a district placed before the voters. The decision is
<br />- I appealad and the ludge is upheld.
<br />j . March 1982 - the water district approves a repayment contract for the project,
<br />1 but the wheels are turning In Washington for cost~sharlng, which eventualty VOIds
<br />'. this contract.
<br />~ . August 1985 - Formal talks begin on cost sharing, as federal, state, local and
<br />( tribal officials negotiate who will put up the money to build the project.
<br />~ . July 1888 - The Interior Department accepts a cost-sharing arrangement that.
<br />.j- calls for state and local entitles to provide some 38 percent of the upfront funding.
<br />~ Just as importantly, rt splits the project in two, putting some major components on
<br />- hold.
<br />. December 1988 - The Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement agree..
<br />ment is signed in Denver. Utes agree to drop claims on San Juan Basin streams in
<br />exchange for water in the Anlmas~La Plata project and about $60 million in scrcall-
<br />ed economic development funds.
<br />. Dec. 8, 1987 - Voters in Durango overwhelmingly approve the repayment con-
<br />" tract and locals prepare for the long~awalted project start.
<br />. February 1980 - The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announces it is studying
<br />: _the project to determine its Impact on endangered fish. Meanwhile, voters in San
<br />: Juan County, N.M., approve their repayment contract.
<br />, . Mey 6, 1990 - The Fish and Wildlife Service calls for a seven-year study of the
<br />,~ project to measure its impact on the endangered squawfish, razorback sucker and
<br />~ humpback chub. Rep. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, D-Cnlo" says the decision eflec-
<br />: tively kills the project.
<br />
<br />'1
<br />
<br />
<br />,-,,-
<br />
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />
<br />30F3
<br />
|