Navajo water a wild card in river’s future; Old rights » 1908 decision gave tribe part of the river
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 29, 2008 at 7:04 amFrom the Salt Lake Tribune:
The commission that created the 1922 Colorado River Compact knew that Mexico, the Navajo and other tribes had rights to the river, but when it divvied up the presumed 15 million acre-feet annual flow, it didn’t define the claims. In 1944, the United States and Mexico agreed that Mexico would get 1.5 million acre-feet per year, resetting the assumed baseline river flow at 16.5 million acre-feet. Four years later, the commission set the Upper Basin states’ shares on a percentage basis rather than an absolute allocation.
Still no mention of Indian tribes, even though an 1850 treaty with the Navajo Nation, reinforced by a 1908 Supreme Court ruling, guaranteed water rights necessary for a permanent homeland.
In 2003, the Navajo Nation sued the Interior Department, seeking to force the U.S. government to, at last, quantify the tribe’s rights.
Some Navajos say a strict interpretation of the treaty and the 1908 ruling in Winters v. United States shows the tribe’s rights trump all others because they were affirmed before the 1922 Colorado Compact. Navajo leaders, however, are pursuing negotiations rather than going back to the Supreme Court. That’s because they realize the justices could wipe out the earlier Winters ruling.
The approach has polarized Navajos, with some alleging the tribe’s attorney, Stanley Pollack, a white man, isn’t fighting hard enough.
Read more from the Salt Lake Tribune by clicking here.
Drought deepens strain on a dwindling Colorado; Flows falling » California first in line as Utah, other states fight for water
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 29, 2008 at 6:59 amFrom the Salt Lake Tribune:
The drought gripping Utah, Southern California and the rest of the Southwest this century shows no sign of ending. Scientists see it as a permanent condition that, despite year-to-year weather variations, will deepen as temperatures rise, snows dwindle, soils bake and fires burn.
That’s grim news for all of us in the West, perhaps most especially for the 10 million residents along the northern stretch of the Colorado River — Utah, New Mexico, Wyoming and Colorado — whose water rights are newer, and therefore junior, to those in Southern California, Nevada and Arizona.
Making matters worse, the Colorado — the 1,450-mile-long lifeline that sustains more than 30 million souls and 3.5 million acres of farmland in seven states, 34 tribal nations and Mexico — is in decline, scientists warn.
Even so, demand for the Colorado’s water echoes from city leaders, industry giants, oil drillers, farmers, fishers, ranchers, boaters, bikers and hikers — along with silent pleas from wildlife and the ecosystem. Trend analyses by federal scientists, probably conservative, predict the population dependent on the river will reach at least 38 million during the coming decade.
Read more from the Salt Lake Tribune by clicking here.
Scientists plan Colorado River Basin’s future
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 21, 2008 at 5:43 amFrom Phoenix’s East Valley Tribune:
Scottsdale played host this week to a major symposium aimed at creating more flexible and detailed management plans for the Colorado River Basin, which supplies water to much of the Western United States, including Arizona.
The goal of the symposium was to develop oversight plans for the basin that can be adapted based on new research and continuous monitoring, said Leslie Gordon, U.S. Geological Survey spokeswoman.
Previously, the U.S. Department of the Interior developed static management plans based on finite studies, she said.
Gordon said participants discussed drought and climate change, as well. “There are trends that we’re observing, not only warmer, but drier. The important thing is to be aware that it is changing and will continue to change,” she said. “There’s still a lot of uncertainty exactly how it will play out.”
Read more from the East Valley Tribune by clicking here.
Wal-Mart contribution to launch Colorado River restoration initiative
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 19, 2008 at 6:23 amFrom Market Watch, this press release from Wal-Mart:
The Texas Parks & Wildlife Foundation announced today a $250,000 donation from Wal-Mart Foundation to provide catalytic funding for a new watershed restoration initiative. Through this Water for Texas initiative, Wal-Mart hopes to help off-set its own water footprint in Texas, help restore native habitats resulting in healthier, more abundant wildlife and fish populations and help provide more and better water for the citizens of Texas.
“By itself, this grant from Wal-Mart Foundation is significant,” said Will Beecherl, Chairman of the TPW Foundation’s Board of Directors. “Not only is this the first time private funding has made such a watershed initiative possible in Texas, it is also a statement and commitment by a major corporation to help protect the unique natural resources of Texas. It will enable the leveraging of other contributions, recruit many partners and multiply the conservation impact to reach heretofore unattainable goals. With the help of other stakeholders, this will easily be a million-dollar plus project every year.”
It is hoped this program will be on-going and will eventually help restore several key watersheds, but it will begin in 2009 on the Colorado River. To accomplish restoration throughout the basin, the TPW Foundation and Wal-Mart Foundation will work with multiple partners, including the Texas Parks & Wildlife Department, the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA), the Upper Colorado River Authority (UCRA), the Colorado River Municipal Water District (CRMWD) and the Texas Organization of Wildlife Management Associations (TOWMA).
Read more from Market Watch by clicking here.
Holding on till the icebergs arrive
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 17, 2008 at 6:13 amFrom the Jackson Hole Tribune:
Sometime this century, the three lower Colorado River basin compact states will start getting their water supplied by the planet’s oceans.
California, Nevada and Arizona already have plans on the drawing board for more traditional methods of tapping into the ocean’s vast water reserves to meet their ever-growing water needs, including the construction of desalination plants and pipelines. Then there are the seemingly off-the-wall proposals to use giant tanker ships with huge water bladders to sweep across the ocean and drag water back to the West coast. Or using tankers to tow giant, insulation-wrapped icebergs from the Arctic to the coast.
Until that actually happens, though, the state [Wyoming] can expect a lot of people will be eyeing the unused water in western Wyoming’s Upper Green River Basin in order to quench those thirsty downstream states.
“Sooner or later, the lower basin will have to go to the ocean to get their water … and those projects show how broadly we continue to think because water is so precious and important in the West,” Wyoming State Engineer Pat Tyrrell said. “Wyoming can’t stand by … we must preserve our developable (water) apportionment until that time,” Tyrrell warned during a two-day conference this weekend on water management issues in the Green River Basin sponsored by the Stroock Forum on Wyoming Public Lands and People.
“If Wyoming, Colorado and Utah were to quit using water today … even a full Colorado River will not satisfy the future needs of Los Angeles, Las Vegas, Phoenix and other cities,” said Tyrrell. “Our job is to keep what we have here, develop what we have here … and fight them until its economically viable for them to go to the ocean,” he said.
More on this article from the Jackson Hole Star Tribune by clicking here.
Leave the venerable Colorado River Compact be, says Mulroy: Water authority says renegotiating Nevada’s take won’t increase our share because climate change is slowing the flows
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 14, 2008 at 6:35 amFrom the Las Vegas Sun:
Nevada’s share of the Colorado River is so small that it seems only logical that a rewriting of the 80-year-old law that divvies up the river would go our way. The Colorado River Compact, after all, allocates Nevada a paltry 300,000 acre-feet of the river’s water, by the far the smallest amount among the compact’s seven U.S. states.
Still, Southern Nevada Water Authority General Manager Pat Mulroy wants to leave the agreement alone.
At an Oct. 28 Brookings Institution event, Mulroy said she is going to make the case “whenever and wherever I can” that the key to the region’s water future can’t be found in any renegotiation of the compact. The reason: Nevada is unlikely to benefit from any attempt to change it, according to Mulroy and Kay Brothers, the water authority’s deputy general manager.
“I don’t think we’d get any more water. In fact, I think we would lose water,” said Brothers, explaining that the law was written during a particularly wet period and that climate change has further sapped an over-allocated river. “When they allocated, they gave away 15 million acre-feet (a year). We know the flows are much less than that.”
Read more from the Las Vegas Sun by clicking here.
Commentary from Colorado: Why we [Colorado] should care about California’s water problems
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on November 6, 2008 at 5:50 amFrom the Grand Junction Free Press, this commentary:
California is in a serious bind. They are running into serious problems with water. Their available water supplies are seriously limited and some are quite high in salts. California, according to a panel I listened to earlier this week in Anaheim, is already having problems with climate change. They are experiencing differences in rain fall and the timing of those rains.
You might ask the question commonly expressed by many in the Grand Valley and throughout western Colorado: “So what, as long as I have water why should I care about California.” That is a common belief among many of you who have the attitude “if I don’t use it California or Denver will steal it.” So why should you be concerned about California’s need for water or any of the other downstream users?
Earlier this week I had the opportunity to attend the annual Irrigation Association conference in Anaheim, Calif. Attending this conference gave me an opportunity to present a paper on the lack of water conservation in western Colorado. (You can find my paper at http://WesternSlopeTurf.org.) This also gave me an opportunity to meet with and discuss water issues with professionals from all over the West. One of the panels on Monday evening covered the seriousness of the problem California faces with its water supply. Listening to the panel reminded me that 50 percent of the fruits, vegetables and nuts consumed throughout the United States come from California. This was certainly enough to get my attention.
Energy independence from foreign countries is a serious issue. The issue of our country being capable of producing our own food is also critical. These are national security issues and not something to take for granted. While we have some fantastic producers of vegetables and fruits in western Colorado, we can not produce everything we need. We need California producers to produce much of what we eat.
Read more of this commentary from the Grand Junction Free Press by clicking here.
Event: “The Fate and Future of the Colorado River”, a 2-day symposium on Colorado River issues
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 26, 2008 at 5:49 amFrom The Examiner:
A gold mine’s worth of experts on California water issues are gathering for a two-day symposium beginning Friday, Oct. 31 at the Huntington Library in San Marino.
Theme of the session is The Fate and Future of the Colorado River. Billed as a multidisciplinary introduction to the history and enduring significance of the Colroado River and its watershed to the Southwest, it will draw from the collective expertise of a wide-ranging group of scientists, scholars, policymakers, elected officals, artists and others.
Open to the public, the event carries a daily fee of $25. For more information, contact Kim at kmatsuna@usa.com.
The meetings will explore the Colorado’s remarkable role in shaping the landscape as well as the diverse human communities dependent on them. The fate of the river–an issue of great environmental and political complexity, and equally great importance–will be the primary focus. The Hungtington Library’s unparalled archival and visual collections pertaining to the Colorado River and its watershed will guide and further inform discussions throughout the two days.
Read more from The Examiner by clicking here.
Tamarisk removal complete on Colorado’s San Miguel River
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 25, 2008 at 5:48 amFrom the Nature Conservancy:
For the first time, a western river infested with tamarisk is now essentially tamarisk-free. An eight-year effort to control this invasive tree that is clogging river banks across the West is coming to a successful close along southwestern Colorado’s San Miguel River. “The impact of these woody invasives is huge — they rob waterways of their health and make recreational access cumbersome,” says The Nature Conservancy’s Peter Mueller, who directs the North San Juan Mountain Program in Colorado.
Tamarisk is estimated to have infested more than 100,000 acres of land in Colorado and more than 1.6 million acres across the West. Also known as salt cedar, tamarisk consumes massive amounts of water, drying up springs, streams and wetlands. Some estimates are that a single tamarisk removes about 200 gallons of river water a day. Tamarisk’s dense growth push out native plants and harms wildlife by blocking entrance to the water. The plant is also a nuisance to boaters and fishermen because it narrows streams and chokes out campsites.
The impact of this tenacious competitor is symptomatic of poor health in much of the Colorado River system, where damming and excessive water use by humans has compromised these rivers ability to function naturally. To address these problems, the Conservancy is working with its partners throughout Colorado and other states on a comprehensive strategy to restore the health of the Colorado River system as a whole.
Read more from the Nature Conservancy by clicking here.
Mohave Valley well owners urged to come forward
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 23, 2008 at 6:22 amFrom the Mohave Daily News:
“Don’t be afraid of us,” said Charles B. “Chip” Sherrill, Mohave Valley Irrigation and Drainage District (MVIDD) board chairman, as he delivered the monthly address at a well-attended Mohave Valley Chamber of Commerce luncheon Wednesday.
Responsible for almost all the water from the Needles Bridge to the Bullhead City line, the MVIDD is the guardian of the valley’s water supply, Sherrill said.
He wants “undocumented” well owners to come out of the shadows for their own good. Even those on file should make sure the information the MVIDD has is accurate, Sherrill said.
“We’re not going to put meters on your wells,” he assured his audience. The MVIDD needs to update its records to give an accurate accounting to the federal Bureau of Reclamation as to how much water is being used in the district so it can be protected, Sherrill said.
Too many cities and states in the thirsty Southwest have designs on the MVIDD’s 41,000 acre-feet allocation of Colorado River water, he said. “Believe me, if they had a chance, they’d take all our water right now.” Sherrill added, “Arizona and California have already been trying to buy water from us.”
More from the Mohave Daily News by clicking here.
Protect the Colorado River: Uranium mining claims should be delayed pending regional environmental review
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on October 20, 2008 at 5:42 amFrom the Las Vegas Sun, this editorial:
When the House Natural Resources Committee voted in June to ban approval of new mining claims adjacent to Grand Canyon National Park, we commented that ore operations should undergo the same environmental scrutiny as is required for coal, oil and gas exploration projects.
Since then Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, who is certainly no friend of the environment, and his Bureau of Land Management have ignored Congress and continued to process mining claims near the canyon. Such contempt for the legislative process is offensive, particularly in this case.
That’s because most of the claims involve uranium, a radioactive metallic element that can be highly toxic to humans and wildlife if ingested in large enough quantities. The legitimate concern raised by environmentalists, water authorities and political leaders, including Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano, is that widespread uranium mining could pollute the Colorado River, which snakes through the canyon. The river is the primary drinking water source for 25 million people, including residents of Southern Nevada, Arizona and Southern California.
Read the rest of this editorial from the Las Vegas Sun by clicking here.
Pipes OK’d for effluent to dump in Lake Mead; Mohave County Supervisor says the move damages water quality for downstream users
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 17, 2008 at 6:30 amFrom the Lake Havasu’s Today’s News-Herald:
The U.S. Interior Department is allowing construction through public lands of a treatment plant and pipeline that will dump effluent into Lake Mead and the Colorado River.
The Bureau of Reclamation and National Park Service Final Environmental Impact Statement Clean Water Coalition Systems Conveyance and Operations Program record of decision was dated Sept. 3. It states the Bureau of Land Management will issue a right-of-way permit to the Clean Water Coalition to construct and operate the “Boulder Islands North Alternative” on BLM land. The pipeline will replace the discharge of effluent through the Las Vegas Wash.
The Clean Water Coalition is made up of the wastewater divisions of the City of Las Vegas, the City of Henderson, Nev., and the Clark County (Nev.) Water Reclamation District.
According to the record of decision, the reason the Interior Department is allowing the use of public lands is “to maintain water quality standards and National Park Service (NPS) recreational and resource values by operating a system that would allow for flexible management of wastewater flow from the Las Vegas Valley to Lake Mead.”
But Mohave County Supervisor Buster Johnson, R-Dist. 3, said the move actually damages water quality. “Hundred of millions of gallons of effluent being dumped into our drinking water at a time when we are trying to clean up the river and protect our drinking water in Mohave County shows the lack of concern for downriver users. I have tried to get other users of the river water to voice their concerns but the Phoenix mayor’s office and others have remained silent,” Johnson said in a press release.
Read more from the Today’s News-Herald by clicking here.
Crucial Grand Canyon sandbars have rapidly eroded
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 10, 2008 at 6:16 amFrom the Associated Press:
Newly built-up sandbars crucial to wildlife in the Grand Canyon have rapidly eroded in the last four months, some shrinking back to the size they were before a costly manmade flood.
Torrents of water were released from the Glen Canyon Dam on the Arizona-Utah line in March to mimic natural flooding and rebuild sandbars along the 277-mile river in the Grand Canyon, where the ecosystem was forever changed by the dam’s construction more than four decades ago.
Officials had expected erosion following the three-day flood, but they hadn’t expected so much so fast. “Circumstances conspired against our being able to protect the beaches as long as we had hoped,” Grand Canyon National Park Superintendent Steve Martin said Tuesday. “Substantial erosion has occurred.”
The accelerated erosion is the result of a requirement to release extra water from Lake Powell above the dam into the Colorado River, said John Hammill, chief of the Grand Canyon Monitoring and Research Center. The requirement says that when Lake Powell has extra water, some of it needs to be released and go to Lake Mead on the Arizona-Nevada line. The requirement is designed to ensure that Colorado River states all get an equal share of water, a precious and limited resource in the West.
Read more from the Associated Press by clicking here.
Colorado’s west slope eyes ‘water bank’; Pool of senior water rights could avert drought cuts
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on September 2, 2008 at 6:29 amFrom Colorado’s Summit Daily News:
Colorado water users could avoid drought shortages by pooling resources to buy or lease senior water rights and hold them in a new Western Slope “water bank,” according to officials with the Colorado River Water Conservation District. Those collective water rights, established prior to a 1922 interstate agreement, would be an insurance policy against downstream demand from California, Arizona and Nevada, said Jim Pokrandt, education specialist with the river district.
“It would be an aggregation of pre-1922 water rights that could be used in case of a compact call,” Pokrandt said, explaining the potential for downstream states to “call” on their water rights at the expense of Colorado’s water users.
Under the 1922 interstate contract, Colorado is obligated to deliver an average of 7.5 million acre feet of Colorado river water downstream annually. In a worst-case scenario, Colorado water users could be forced to cut some of their existing uses if the downstream states demand their full allotment. Water rights established before the compact was signed are not subject to the agreement.
Stored in a water bank, those senior rights could be used to provide water for Western Slope municipalities — even if the downstream demands cut into Colorado’s allotment of water, said Boulder water attorney Glenn Porzak.
Read more from the Summit Daily News by clicking here.
Water washes away Democrats united front
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 27, 2008 at 12:26 pmCan you stand another story about John McCain’s statement about renegotiating the Colorado compact? Well, here’s another, this one from the blog “DMC @ the Conventions” but this one isn’t as much about McCain’s statement as it is about the background and history behind the issue:
But whether it was a calculated statement, or an inadvertent slip of the tongue, McCain brought up an uncomfortable and, at least among non-politicians, an undisputed truth: Colorado has the water and the lower basin states have the people. To the extent that there is available, unappropriated water in the Colorado River basin, it belongs to Colorado and the upper basin states.
Along with McCain’s home state of Arizona, California and Nevada have struggled as booming populations and regional droughts have exacerbated the impact of stagnant or diminishing water resources. Renegotiation of the compact might substantially benefit Arizona and its neighbors, and might also damage the interests of the upper basin states.
But as Western Water Assessment Director Brad Udall said last year, Colorado and Arizona may be fighting over phantom water. The drought of the past several years, Udall said, had resulted in the loss of 30 million acre feet of water from storage in Lake Mead and Lake Powell, meaning that any unappropriated water in the Colorado exists only on paper. And while last year’s wet winter has improved storage in both reservoirs, the underlying situation is unchanged.
During the Democratic National Convention in Denver this week, Colorado Rep. John Salazar and Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano offered very different perspectives about the continuing regional water wars.
“Water is the lifeblood of Colorado,” Salazar said. “That’s a bipartisan coalition. Without water, we don’t have an economy, there’s no more room to develop. (Renegotiating the compact) would devastate this state.”
Napolitano’s position was more nuanced, and she cited the fact that the compact has already been revised. “I don’t think that Sen. McCain was aware of this, but we just redid the Colorado River compact in 2007,” she said. “That was signed. The Colorado River is not the most important source (of Arizona’s water). There are lots of pieces to the water puzzle other than the compact. There’s recharge, growth management techniques, re-use - just ways that we use water more efficiently.
“There are lots of things to the water puzzle beyond the Colorado River, but, as I said, we just reinked new amendments to the Colorado River Compact.”
However ‘re-doing’ isn’t quite the same as renegotiating, this blog post points out, and continues on with a very level-headed discussion of the Colorado compact. A good read - worth the click through. Read more from the DMC@the conventions blog by clicking here.
Amid dry times in the West, a lake raises spirits
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 24, 2008 at 5:12 am
From the New York Times:
The story of water in the West is largely one of boom and bust, and lately, during a persistent drought, it was mainly bust. But now and then the rains and snow come, the streams and rivers gush, the huge lake here expands and the rhapsody of the rise commences. “The red sands, the cliffs,” said Bill Floor as he readied his boat for a jaunt through a channel not open in years because receding waters left it dry. “Lake Powell has its own special spirit.”
Such excitement abounds in this summer of bountiful water, at least on the lake. That is right: in a drought, Lake Powell, unexpectedly and improbably, has risen to its highest point in six years, in the biggest increase since the dry period began in the fall of 1999. Euphoric locals organized a contest to guess the precise time when the waters, swelled by higher than normal mountain snows this past winter, would fill Castle Rock Cut, the channel through which Mr. Floor prepared to pass.
Boaters who had stayed away are flocking back. Hotels are full and booked a month in advance, although it is difficult to discern how much of that is because of the lake or the surge of European tourists — “they love the heat and Westerns and anything having to do with cowboys and Indians,” one merchant said — taking advantage of the weak dollar.
Water managers are watching for signs of a long-term letup in the drought. For now, caution rules the day. “The nature of the beast is we don’t know if we are in or out of a drought until a couple of years go by because we are talking about long-term trends,” said Barry Wirth, a spokesman for the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency that manages the system of dams and reservoirs on the Colorado River that provides water for 25 million people in seven states, and includes Lake Powell. “We could have a good year in the midst of bad years,” he said. “We just don’t know.”
Read more from the New York Times by clicking here.
BOR to hold meeting in Laughlin regarding wells & the Colorado River
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 22, 2008 at 5:15 amFrom the Mojave Daily News:
Well owners will get a chance Monday to get information on a federal attempt to further regulate Tri-state well water.
The Bureau of Reclamation will hold a meeting Monday in Laughlin to answer public questions on a proposed rule concerning the use of the Colorado River. The meeting will be held from 1-3 p.m. Monday in the Taos 1 and Taos 2 conference rooms at the Edgewater Casino, 2020 S. Casino Drive in Laughlin. Other meetings will be held Wednesday and Thursday in Parker, Blythe and Yuma.
The rule would determine which wells in the lower Colorado River are pumping river water. There will also be options for illegal well users to legitimize their use of Colorado River water. The accounting surface involved in the rules stretches along the Colorado River from Hoover Dam to the Mexico border south of Yuma. In the Bullhead City area, the area involves the Colorado River aquifer from Davis Dam to Parker Dam.
BOR’s lower Colorado Region Director Lorri Gray said the primary goal is to legalize the use of well water so it can be accounted for. BOR estimates there are 9,000 to 15,000 acre feet of water being unlawfully used. Most of that can be legalized through new contracts between the well owners and the BOR, Gray said.
Read more from the Mojave Daily News by clicking here.
Do uranium mines belong near Grand Canyon? Mining companies stake claims on federal land adjoining the park, while opponents say drinking water will be at risk
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 20, 2008 at 5:36 amFrom the Christian Science Monitor:
On a ragged outcrop just a short walk from a Grand Canyon overlook where millions of visitors annually come to gawk at one of the world’s most stunning vistas sits the old Orphan uranium mine. Soil radiation levels around it are 450 times higher than normal. It’s encircled by a protective fence.
A sign warns: “Remain behind fence – environmental evaluation in progress.” In the canyon hundreds of feet below, another sign by gurgling Horn Creek instructs thirsty hikers not to drink its radioactive water.
Even so, Horn Creek eventually splashes its way to the canyon bottom and into the Colorado River, a vital water source for 25 million people from Las Vegas to Los Angeles to San Diego. In that mighty river, the Orphan’s radioactive dribble is diluted to insignificance.
But what if a dozen or even scores of new uranium mines were leaching uranium radioisotopes into this critical water source? That is what Arizona’s governor, water authorities in two states, scientists, environmentalists, and Congress are all worried about. Should they be?
Everybody from mining-industry officials to environmentalists agrees that the Orphan mine is a poster child for the bad old days of uranium mining going back to the 1950s. Today’s regulations and newer mining techniques make such pollution far less likely, industry officials say, though environmentalists vehemently disagree. The question remains: Is Orphan only a vision of the past – or is it a vision of the future, too?
The US Southwest may be about to find out. Driven by soaring uranium prices and fresh interest in nuclear power, mining companies have staked more than 10,600 exploratory mineral claims – most of them smaller than five acres – spread across 1 million acres of federal land adjacent to the Colorado River and Grand Canyon National Park, a federal official told Congress in June. Most are uranium claims, though some may be for other metals, observers say.
Read more from the Christian Science Monitor by clicking here.
McCain campaign on damage control; Here’s what he really meant
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 20, 2008 at 5:32 amApparently regretting his comments to the Pueblo Chieftain, the McCain campaign speaks out about what he really meant. From New West:
McCain set off a firestorm last week when he suggested that the 86 year old agreement that allocates the scarce resource of the Colorado River among the seven states of the Colorado Basin “obviously needs to be renegotiated” because of “new realities of high growth, of greater demands on a scarcer resource,” he didn’t mean it should, you know, be renegotiated, really, to make sure that the high growth states of California, Nevada, and Arizona got more of that scarce resource. But that’s sure how it sounded to the people of Colorado.
So here comes the McCain campaign with what he “really” meant:
Tom Kise, the McCain campaign’s Colorado spokesman, said McCain was not proposing that the 2007 agreement be reopened or any immediate talks on the compact.
“He’s talking about ongoing conversations, conversations that happen this year, next year, 10, 20, 30 years down the road,” Kise said.
Kise said McCain knows global warming is changing water conditions in the West, and that means the states need to talk. “As long as water is going to be an issue in the West, there should be an open conversation among all parties,” Kise said.
Frankly, that’s hard to buy. There is no other reasonable interpretation of his statement that the Compact should be reopened because of the reality of growth in the Lower Basin. Certainly he is not suggesting that the Lower Basin states should cede some of their rights. And as to the states needing to talk, well, they have.
More from New West by clicking here.
And Mitt Romeny clarifies McCain’s statements in this story from Colorado’s Channel 9:
“Senator McCain has no interest in reopening the compact,” Romney said. “Senator McCain believes as I do that a compact that’s been worked out between the governors and between the states is the right way to go. States are the ones who build these kinds of understandings. The federal government shouldn’t meddle in that compact.
“I think the senator recognizes that way down the road there may be changes and that states will come together to reconsider the settings at that point, but there’s no reason on the senator’s mind to re-open the compact or to insert federal interests. This is an issue that’s been resolved by the states and should stay resolved as it has been by the states.”
The response from one of McCain’s top surrogates did little to assuage Colorado Democrats.
“Sen. McCain made a major blunder and now Gov. Romney is trying to provide some political cover,” wrote Ritter’s Communications Director Evan Dreyer in an e-mail to 9News. “It won’t work. Sen. McCain showed his true colors: he’s a Lower Basin Senator trying to grab up as much Upper Basin, Colorado water as possible. Coloradans won’t take kindly to that.”
“Senator McCain said very clearly that he believes the Colorado River Compact should be opened for renegotiation,” wrote Salazar’s Press Secretary Matt Lee-Ashley in an e-mail to 9NEWS. “Either Senator McCain is so out of touch with Western water issues that he needs the former Massachusetts governor to defend him, or he really has some interest in overhauling the law of the river that has been in place since 1922. Both scenarios are troubling.”
More from Colorado’s Channel 9 by clicking here.
Dam fails, scores are evacuated; Flash flood warning still in effect in tribal area
Posted by: Aqua Blog Maven on August 18, 2008 at 6:07 amFrom the Las Vegas Review-Journal:
Days of heavy rain around the Grand Canyon created flooding that caused an earthen dam to fail Sunday, and helicopters plucked scores of residents and campers from the gorge. No injuries were immediately reported.
The dam break caused flooding in a side canyon containing Supai village, where about 400 members of the Havasupai tribe live, said Gerry Blair, a spokesman for the Coconino County Sheriff’s Department. Crews airlifted 170 people from the village and nearby campgrounds. Evacuees were bused to an American Red Cross center, officials said.
There were no confirmed reports of damage in Supai, which is on high ground, Blair said, and many residents and campers chose to stay. “We’re not as concerned about it as we initially were,” he said, adding that the dam isn’t a “huge, significant” structure.
Still, a flash flood warning remained in effect, and search and rescue teams stayed in the village overnight.
Aquafornia's Information Desk
Aquafornia Photos on Flickr
Upcoming Events
Check out the upcoming events from the Water Education Foundation.
Recent Posts
- C-WIN, CSPA file suit to end wasteful Delta diversions, protect public trust resources
- Angelenos heed water warnings
- Indian tribes awaiting Klamath Dam removal
- Whitaker-Bermite facility: The perchlorate cleanup plan is a reality, says commentary
- Suppliers seek approval for the “Delta Habitat Conservation and Conveyance Program”
- Salmon-tracking network challenges conventional wisdom
- State panel floats ‘litter tax’ to curb debris along coast
- Delta smelt closer to extinction
- Water settlement knots finally untangling
- Normal rainfall predicted for north state this winter
- Should we recycle urine on Earth, too?
- Who will be Delta’s keeper?
- Increasingly scarce water is the new California gold
- Californians need to worry about food security, says commentary
- Court rejects POWER appeal of All-American Canal case
Aquafornia's Mission
Aquafornia's mission is to educate readers about the complex and often controversial issues surrounding water in California.
Aquafornia is affiliated with the Water Education Foundation, an impartial non-profit organization, whose mission is to create a better understanding of water issues and help resolve water resource problems through educational programs.
Find It
Save / E-mail / Share Aquafornia
E-mail Newsletter
To receive email announcements from the Water Education Foundation, sign up here.
News Article Archives
- Agriculture
- Aquafornia Exclusives
- Biofuels
- Bottled water
- Climate change & water supply
- Commentary
- Conservation
- Delta Issues
- Desalination
- Development & Water
- Drinking Water
- Drought Tolerant Landscaping
- Drought, Weather & Snowpack
- Endangered Species & Wildlife
- Environment & Water
- Events
- General Water Issues
- Grandiose water plans
- Great Green Ideas
- Groundwater
- Indian Water Rights
- Infrastructure
- International Water Issues
- Invasive Species
- Levees
- Monterey Agreements
- National water news
- Oceans and Beaches (all)
- Odds and Ends
- Recycled Water
- Regional Water Issues
- All-American Canal
- Antelope Valley
- Bakersfield
- Bay Area
- Coachella Valley
- Colorado River Basin
- Imperial Irrigation District & Imperial Valley
- Lake Tahoe & the Sierra's
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles River
- Northern California
- Orange County
- Owens Valley & Mono Lake
- Riverside - San Bernardino
- Sacramento
- Salton Sea
- San Diego
- San Joaquin Valley
- Southern California
- Southwest Water Issues
- Westlands Water District
- Stromwater & Urban Runoff
- Uncategorized
- Water & Energy
- Water & Investing
- Water Agency News (all)
- Water Banking
- Water History
- Water Legislation
- Water Quality
- Water Rights
- Water Storage
- Water Supply
- Water Technologies
- Water Transfers
- Weird & Wacky Water News
