|
<br />
<br />Valley must
<br />stand united
<br />~gainst water
<br />
<br />"J".
<br />
<br />export. Rlalls .
<br />
<br />... Q\a.(1IOft'- )/..il,,':l (6<.t.t'tQ\"" p. c.j
<br />By MELVIN GETZ3-l2_'1(
<br />Rio Grande Commissioner
<br />If. anyone had any doubts about what strategy
<br />Gary Boyce and his Stockman' s Watee Company
<br />w~ul~ pursue in his quest to pump thousands.of
<br />acre feet of water out 'of the San Luis'Vallev,
<br />newspaper articles over the last couple of -weeks
<br />sf'!ould make it perfectly clear. Divide and conquer,
<br />Il,lrn environmentalist against agriculture, farmer
<br />against rancher, surface water user against well
<br />user, the haves against the have-nots. Hispanics
<br />against Anglos and the list goes on and on, trying to
<br />drive the wedges into any cracks that have devel-
<br />oped over the years in our diverse society which
<br />eii~ts in the San Luis Valley.
<br />.~t is true that the different interests in the VaHey
<br />h~ve had many _confrontations in the past. The court
<br />records are full of lawsuits between river basins,
<br />canal companies, individuals water users. 'well own-
<br />ers, etc.
<br />The Closed Basin Project generated great contro--
<br />versy, some of which. still exists;
<br />~e Rules and Regulations Case. (Conejos vs.
<br />The Rio Grande) was probably thelargest case ever_
<br />heard in the Valley next to the A WDI case.
<br />:Lesser struggles. but still important. have taken.
<br />place involving the DOW, cities. environmental
<br />groups, senior water rights ys. junior. north side
<br />water users vs. south side water users and at some
<br />times, the Rio Grande Water Users and the Reser-
<br />vo.ir Companies have been at odds with the di vision
<br />Engineer.
<br />
<br />(' ("' ('I"":, ('/
<br />'"'-< ~ {,; -' \~
<br />
<br />.",
<br />
<br />Many of the warriors who fought these battles
<br />have lingering memories of animosity which devel-
<br />oped between the different players, some of which
<br />still exists today.
<br />Many diverse opinions still exist between differ-
<br />ent groups in the Valley who have concerns and
<br />a~endas Which may be quite different than the main.
<br />s~ream thinking on water matters.
<br />:We do not all agree on many issues such as wild
<br />a~d. scenic river designations. minimum in-stream
<br />f!<>w r.e~uirements. underground aquifer water st6r~
<br />age proJects, well pumping ;vs. siirface diversion
<br />a-pd many other issues. ;'~ -:.: .:; ,.:. .:;.. .-
<br />~It is into this environment that Mr. Boyce comes
<br />~ith h~s thinly veiled "divide and conquer" strat-
<br />~gy. HIS proposed ballot initiatives_are designed to
<br />hhld a carrot out to some groups and try to lead them
<br />
<br />?:.vay from the solid coalition of many di verse
<br />'tlt.erests that was put together to fight A WDI.
<br />.:The people of the San Luis Vaney must not let
<br />t.f1is strategy succeed.
<br />:Ifyou are an.i'!.dividuaJ or a group who believes
<br />t.6at some of Mr. Boyce's carrots may be the answer
<br />t~ some of your goals which you may have in the
<br />V.alley. r w.ould only ask that you also consider
<br />\4~at effect a pipeline carrying water out of the
<br />~itlley would have on those goals.
<br />
<br />:~y au must realize that although the original amount
<br />of water approved for export may not be an that
<br />niticb, once the pipeline is built and the precedent is
<br />s~t, the amount of water exported will continue to
<br />irt~ease as long as there is a demand on the front
<br />r!n.ge and large amounts of money to pay for it.
<br />
<br />Officials must remain diligent in protecting water rights
<br />IJIO'.~"'r~~.,....3~/:> . .
<br />Water -is essentiano hfe, and in Colorado..wa- Q recovery of species in Nebraska's tion of~ Rights., Public Entity Standing," will
<br />ter is a scarce commodity. The Front Range Central Plane Basin. A key benefit to be sponsored by Sen. Don Ament and me.
<br />receives about 4 inches of precipitation in water users is that lhe program will Increased diligence is ca:lled for in the protection of
<br />an average year. Ten inches or less define a serve as a "reasonable and prudent Colorado's water rights. Recall the foresight of our
<br />dC'iert. In fact, early mapmakers labeled an area inc1ud- alternative" for the impacts of water predecessors~ All the "senior" water pioneeiS" who ad-
<br />ing ~he eastern plains as lhe "Great American Desert." projects in the South Platte Basin. dressed ourconunittee stressed the need fo~more wa~
<br />To complicate matters further. 85 percent of our Wilhout this, the approval of each ter storage. We are now in a time of plenty: According
<br />~[(lle'$ moisture falls on lhe Western Slope, while 90 project on a case by case basis up to tree ring litudies, the 1980s were the wettest water
<br />per ~.::m of us live on the Eastern Slope. In addition, 50 against the powerful Endangered R cycle we have ever had. and that has continued into the
<br />percent of our water flows down our rivers in May and . Species Act could cripple Colorado's ep. 1990s. When drought comes, it will be too late to act.
<br />June. highlighting the need for water diversion and water development under a flood of Steve We don't feel the need to act, and so~e even deny
<br />storage projects to provide a dependable, year-round cost and litigation. the value of what we have done in the past Incredibly.
<br />water supply. Many committee members, my-. Johnson lhe Sierra Club recently called for the draining of Lake
<br />Early leaders in Colorado knew these things. They self included, strongly stated that if ._V~~ Powell, a lake lhat enables us to ,use the water of the
<br />dealt with incredible droughts, lhe likes of which we society as a whole values the reeov- Colorado River by ens.uring delivery of our "compact"
<br />have not seen in 50 years. In the dust bowl of the early ery of endangered species. then all of Guest obligations to the Lower Basin states. Andourown
<br />1930s, these pioneers laid visionary plans that became us, not just water users, pay the cost. Columnist federal govemment blackmails our.municipalitit/$ by
<br />the Colorado Big Thompson Project. Without it. lOost It is a growing injustice today lhat ,taking their;water in exchange for relicensing their ex-
<br />of us could not and would not be here today. the property owner (warerrights are property rights) is isting water projects on federal lands. This "politics of
<br />Water remains a crucial topic. At the end of the .1997 expected to bear alone the entire burden and cost of so- confrontation~ mus~ be.rep1aced with the development
<br />legislative session. I was appointed to ajoint House- ciety's goals. "Make someone else (lhe property owner) of win~win agreements(.such as the.Platte.River Recov~
<br />Senate Interim Committee to examine contemporary is- pay for it" is the easy way out. . ery Program, if we are.to meet all of Colorado's obliga-
<br />sues surrounding water use. development and _ Another committee bill will give state and local gov- tions in the future. , .
<br />protection. Several bills of particular importance to our emments the right to claim a "taking" of their property As Colomdo grows, we must not retreat from the
<br />area emerged from this comrriittee and are being heard rights (including but not limited to-water). Individuals need to develop. control and use widely our precious
<br />during the 1998 session.. can sue for a taking as a result of government action, water resources. .
<br />Ont: of the bills provides funding for lhe Platte River but a government entity such as a water district cannot
<br />Endangered Species Recovery Program. This agree- sue. This measure will also strengthen our state's posi-
<br />ment among Colorado, Wyoming, Nebrnska and the tion against actions of the federal government that
<br />C.S. D.~artment of the Interior outlines a plan for the threaten Colorado's water rights. This bill. the ''Pror:ec-
<br />
<br />Rep. Steve Johnson represents House District 49
<br />which includes portions of both Larimerand Weld
<br />Counties.
<br />
<br />......,..;.
<br />
|