My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05306
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05306
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:17:46 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:57:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Getches and Meyers
Title
The River of Controversy - Persistent Issues
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
52
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 />tration of pollutants In the water and thereby decrease water quality. A <br /> <br />provision in the Clean Water Act stating that it should not impair the states' <br />71 <br />authority to allocate water arguably does not prevent the United States <br /> <br />Environmental Protection Ag~ncy from settin~ mini~um ~at~r quality in order to <br /> <br />establish requirements. This could test the reach of federal authority if it <br /> <br />meant limiting the amount of water diverted under state authority. The only <br /> <br />federal attempts to limit state water allocation to assure water quality so <br /> <br />'far have been under Section 404 of the Act which gives the government author- <br /> <br />72 <br />ity to issue "dredge and fill" permits for any waters or wetlands. <br /> <br />Statutes besides the Clean Water Acr can be vehicles for asserting fed- <br /> <br />eral supremacy over state control of water use. The Endangered Species Act <br /> <br />can be enforced independently of the Clean Water Act if the habitat of an <br /> <br />endangered or threatened species is harmed or the species itself is "harassed" <br />7J <br />or "taken" within the meaning of the statute. Conceivably the diversion of <br /> <br />more water from an already heavily saline river could affect protected fish or <br /> <br />wildlife to the extent that the Act could pose an obstacle to further diver- <br /> <br />Q~l~ ~~;r~e <br /> <br />Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act demands that there be special <br /> <br />consideration of the effects of federal water projects.74 This is less likely <br /> <br />to produce a head-on confrontation with state-controlled water resources but <br /> <br />could seriously affect the way a new federal project is developed or an <br /> <br />existing project is operated. <br /> <br />(sh2) <br /> <br />How Will The Water Quality Burdens Of Meeting The Mexican Treaty Obligation Be <br />~ <br /> <br />The 1944 treaty entitling Mexico to 1.5 million acre-feet a year of <br /> <br />Colorado River Water did not address water quality.75 ~y 1~61. water quality <br /> <br />had degenerated so that water was not suitable for irrigation by the time it <br /> <br />- 21 - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.