Two weeks ago I sent the following letter to the Interbasin Compact Committee, demanding that they take action on mitigation for water transfers.

Dear Inter-Basin Compact Committee:

As you know, I recently sponsored House Bill 10-1159. The purpose of HB1159 was to require agreements for the mitigation of economic and ecological impacts associated with the removal of water from one water division for use in another. The parties to the agreements would have been the applicants seeking to transport the water and the conservation or conservancy districts serving the area from which the water would be removed.  If the parties could not reach an agreement then the water judge would apply mitigation based on standards from the 1937 Water Conservancy District Act.

Virtually all parties, including those opposed to HB1159, agreed that mitigation should occur when water is transferred.  However, during the debate, opponents of the bill consistently made one argument; they stated that the bill was unnecessary because the Inter-Basin Compact Committee (IBCC) was charged with and, in fact, was already dealing with the issue.  During the Agriculture Committee hearing, several witnesses from, both, metro water providers and rural communities testified that my water mitigation bill was duplicative of the work that the IBCC is conducting.  Some people making this argument were members of the IBCC.  When the bill reached the House floor, several legislators continued this line of argument.

I believe that the IBCC is doing great work and is creating trust between parties that have historically been rather adversarial. However, I am unaware of specific proposals from the IBCC regarding proposed statutory changes to ensure mitigation of impacts resulting from the movement of water.  After the debate on HB1159, it is safe to now say that most legislators believe this work is being conducted by the IBCC.  I would appreciate any information you could provide as to the IBCC’s discussions regarding appropriate mitigation when moving water between water divisions.  If the IBCC is not working on any such plan, I would suggest that the IBCC start these discussions, if for no other reason than that is what most legislators believe you are working on.  Finally, if you could make every effort to conclude these discussions prior to the next legislative session, I would be happy to sponsor any legislation needed to implement your recommendations.

Thank you for your consideration,