wheres a good voodo doll when you need it

By Karl Puckett, USA TODAY … GREAT FALLS, Mont. — For decades, ranchers and farmers across the West have tapped into rivers and streams on or near Indian reservations. Now, as drought conditions plague big parts of the region, they're concerned their access to those sources could dry up. Although the U.S. Supreme Court gave tribes the primary rights to streams on their reservations in 1908, until recently, 19 tribes in the West had not exercised those rights. This year, tribes in Montana, New Mexico, Idaho, Nevada and California are on the verge of securing their claims. That could result in less water, or higher water prices, for non-Indian agricultural producers and communities downstream, according to Victor Marshall, an attorney who represents irrigators in New Mexico's San Juan Valley. Marshall acknowledges that Indian tribes have more water coming to them. But he argues the amounts they are seeking are more than they can realistically use on the reservation.
Rivers, streams redirected David Gover, an attorney for the Native American Rights Fund in Boulder, Colo., argues that the diversion of Indian waters by non-Indians was "a direct attack on their resources." "It's one of the most important resources we have available for the development of our economies," Gover said. Because rainfall is so meager in much of the West, huge distribution systems made up of dams, reservoirs and canals, both privately and publicly constructed, redirect rivers and streams. This allows residents miles away to have water for drinking, fire protection, growing crops and raising livestock. In most cases, non-Indians pay operation fees for government-owned storage and irrigation systems on reservations, but the water is free. States and tribes must negotiate how much the tribes have coming before the federal rights are exercised, said Craig Bell, executive director of the Western States Water Council in Salt Lake City. He expects Congress to consider seven or eight settlements in 2008. Congress has ratified 21 Indian water rights deals in the past 25 years, Bell said. After reaching an agreement with the states, tribes ask Congress for millions of dollars to build reservoirs and pipelines. Give and take produced satisfactory results to both sides in the largest Indian water rights settlement in history in 2004 in Arizona, according to John Hestand, senior water counsel for the Gila River Indian Community, and John Sullivan of the Salt River Project, which delivers water to the Phoenix area. The 40-year, $2.4 billion deal involved the Pima, Maricopa and Tohono O'odham tribes and non-Indian users. The largest bill before Congress this year is the Navajo's claim to the New Mexico portion of the San Juan River, which would authorize $800 million over 20 years. Votes could come this spring in Senate and House committees.

Our Governor and her ADWR and ADEQ continuously reassure us that Arizona will have all the water we need, right…?

After all we do have any clear, concise and understandable – water – policy or conservation program in place, don’t we…?

Developers are free to continue to issue those rather meaningless water assurances to unsuspecting home buyers, while no one from the Real Estate sector asks any “hard” questions…?

Ask our legislators, you say, no they’re much too busy posturing over a bogus budget…?

Oh, by the way, the San Juan River is a significant contributor to the Colorado River upon which we are building our “unsustainable” economic model of unrestricted growth.

Where’s a good voodoo doll when you need it … ?