WSP06117

• File Number: 8583
• Description: Rio Grande Decision Support System
• State: CO
• Basin: Rio Grande
• Water Division: 3
• Date: 1/1/1988
• Author: Steven J. Shupe & Jo
• Title: The Upper Rio Grande: A Guide To Decision-Making
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Publication

40

/'

(\ II f 1 ' ~ .',
strength along the'RitrQ4,a4n'a'ahd
the stretch of Rio Grande north of
Otowi Bridge,

The legal status of the community
acequla, a political subdivision of
the state, was recognized by the
first session of the New Mexico Ter-
ritorial Legislature in 1851. There
are today seventy-five statutes in
this state alone which govern ace-
quias, giving them the power to
sue and be sued, the power of emi,
nent domain, exemption from taxa-
tion of association lands (the
ditches themselves), and other
political responsibilities and
advantages,

All owners of land with irrigation
rights within the area served by the
acequia are members of the acequia
association, with the attending
rights and responsibilities. The
association serves as the commu-
nity body that manages and oper-
ates the activities of the acequia.
These activities usually include dis-
tributing and allocating water,
maintaining the ditches and gates,
and promoting agricultural activi-
ties and interests.

Although there is some discretion
in the operation of acequias, law
requires election of officers and
preparation of bylaws. The acequia
officers are the mayordomo, or
superintendent, and three comision-
ados, commissioners who serve as
chairperson, secretary and treas-
urer of the comision. Ditch associa-
tion members, known as parciontes,
are entitled to vote in these elec-
tions in proportion to the interest
they hold in the ditch or water; the
member's vote is usually based
upon the amount of acreage
irrigated.

Under the statutes, ditch members
may also be assessed annual fees
for the operation and maintenance
of the acequia. The assessments are
usually based upon the amount of
water used or acreage irrigated by
each member, Additionally, mem-
bers are required to work, provide
workers, or pay a fee to clean the
acequia each spring prior to irrigat,
ing, and at other times if the

mayordomo requests. Delinquent
members can be sued for non-
payment in court, and cannot take
water in the meantime.

WATER MANAGEMENT
CONCERNS OF THE ACEQUIAS

PRESERVATION OF
ACEQUIA WATER

There are increasing pressures on
the acequia system, resulting in
challenges to the local irrigating
economy and the traditional way of
life which it sustains. Acequia
members must now face the fact
that water is fast becoming a com-
modity in the market sense. There
are forces which are ready, willing
and able to pay a market price for
irrigation rights, in order to supply
a variety of uses for increasing
urban populations, irrigation inter-
ests in the southern part of the
basin, energy concerns, and even
out of state interests.

Like any water right holder, the tra-
ditional user values and wants to
protect this property right. Some
irrigators are taking advantage of
the increasing market value of their
water, and are selling it to interests
outside the community. Others
remaining in the irrigation business
within the community fear an epi-
demic of this profit.taking would
completely change the nature of the
community. They would like to be
able to retain that water for agricul-
tural use, and this desire has led to
several efforts on the legal front.

The power of the acequia to control
transfers of irrigation water is being
challenged in court in a water rights
transfer case commonly known as
the Sleeper case [In the Matter of
Howard Sleeper, et 01, Rio Arriba
County Cause No, RA 84 53 (C)].
Two acequia members applied to
the State Engineer's office to change
the point of diversion for 75,54 acre
feet of irrigation water which tradi-
tionally flowed through the
Ensenada Ditch. The members had
conditionally sold their water rights
to a developer who planned a resort
in this traditionally agricultural area
east of Tierra Amarilla. After the
State Engineer approved the trans-

fer, other acequia irrigators (mem-
bers of the Ensenada Land and
Water Users Association) protested
the approval in district court, claim-
ing that their water rights as well as
the character of the local commu,
nity would be undermined by the
transfer.

"

District Court Judge Art Encinias
ruled in favor of the protestants,
and upheld the acequia interests by
applying the "public interest crite,
rion" to the proposed transfer, The
public interest cannot be measured
in marketplace terms alone, he
said, "[The case] , , , pits economic
values against cultural values.
Here, it is Simply assumed by the
Applicants that greater economic
benefits are more desirable than the
preservation of a cultural identity.
This is clearly not so. . . .This region
of northern New Mexico and its liv-
ing culture are recognized at the
state and federal levels as possess-
ing significant cultural value, not
measurable in dollars and cents.
The deep felt and tradition bound
ties of northern New Mexico fami-
lies to the land and water are cen-
tral to the maintenance of that
culture :'

,:,

Judge Encinias also pointed to
impairment of the remaining water
rights in the acequia because of the
decreased amount of water in the
ditch, a fact which would deprive
other members of important early
spring water for stock use and soil
preparation. He did not recognize
as a "detriment" the fact that
removing water rights from the
ditch would increase costs to the
remaining irrigators, although he
admitted that this would happen,

The Sleeper decision was appealed
and arguments were heard by the
Court of Appeals in November
1987. Lawyers for the State Engineer
and for Sleeper argued that the
Encinias decision would have a
chilling effect on the State
Engineer's ability to decide water
allocation decisions in the future.
They also challenged the constitu,
tionality of the court's ranking of
agricultural concerns above recrea-