BigGameHunt.net Hunting Forums

[bitmasher]

Colorado river water use is a regional issue but a contentious one if your familiar with western U.S. politics.

McCain gets interviewed by the Pueblo Chieftain and the talk turns to water, you can read the interview here:

http://www.chieftain.com/artic.....542859.txt

McCain says basically there are water problems, the governors want/should meet, I support that and agree with whatever they come up with, hey maybe we can even find some federal matching funds to help Colorado with water projects. McCain's exact words:

"Conditions have changed dramatically, so I'm not saying that anyone would be forced to do anything because I'm a federalist and believe in the rights of states".

Now the Democrats and the Denver Post editors get ahold of the interview and the chest pounding begins:

McCain suggests raiding Colorado's water
http://www.denverpost.com/opin.....source=rss

Yes that word is RAIDING: inflammatory, sensational, eye catching. Exactly what caught my eye. Of course both articles quote Ritter (Democrat Governor) and Salazar (Democrat Senator) making heroic comments that they personally will save Colorado's water from the that bad boy Republican presidential candidate.

Colorado had a bit of a political shake up last election cycle, with Democrats taking both houses of the state congress and the governors seat as well. Lately polls around here have been showing a shift toward McCain from a stronger Obama position earlier this year. I suspect this water "issue" is one way for the power D's in Colorado to score some quick political talking points without even bothering to see what McCain actually said...

Kudo's to the Pueblo Chieftan for having a fair article. The reaction too it highlights the spin between Democrats and the press.

Oh yes and one point for SoCo. This is a perfect example of Democrats using the politics of fear.

[SoCoKHntr]

First off, you are a Coloradoan and are for us giving more water away to California and Arizona due to rapid population growth there??? With citizens like that who needs out of state enemies. I see nothing wrong with Colorado elected officials protecting Colorado resources. If that's a bad thing to you well we just don't see eye to eye.

Second thing growing up in Pueblo for thirty or so years of my soon to be 38 years of life on this Earth it is common knowledge the Pueblo Chieftain is owned and run by a very conservative family and the paper has always been favorable to Republican issues even though Pueblo itself is mostly Democrat.

Edit:

Also, just took a look at the Post piece which was obviously anti-Mccain, but bitmasher did you realize this is an OPINION PIECE and not a regular article. You can make that distinction right. Because it seems you are trying to imply that this is a reported article instead of what it's clearly identified as which again is an opinion piece which as we all know isn't objective or supposed to be but rather a person who is undeniably biased one way giving their opinion on the issue.

[cowgal]

SoCo, how in the world does a recommendation (by McCain) to discuss the water issues turn into RAIDING Colorado's water??? McCain stated he was not getting involved in the water issues, but encouraged the state's governors to openly discuss.

The water pact is nearly a century old. It may be time revisit and discuss. It may be time to strengthen Colorado's position.

And while we're discussing water issues, the only reason the Colorado dems want to shut other states out of the discussion, is so they themselves can keep robbing the western slope of water to feed the eastern slope's growth binge. Sure keep it all in Colorado, but lets siphon it off to the east! Maybe Ken Salazar better open his eyes to what's happened to his beloved San Luis Valley. Sucking the water out of that valley has damaged the aquifer and hurt the ecosystem. The pact needs to be revisited, so the western slope can keep its water and stop losing it to the east.

Trust me, no Coloradoan wants to give water away. I did not see anywhere in McCain's words that, that was his intention.

[SoCoKHntr]

You gotta point there I admit, but it also seems like 'let's restructure' the pact another way of saying 'we want more water'. Even if it's being siphoned to the Eastern Plains my loyalties will be with Colorado more so then AZ and Ca. I l flew over Phoenix last summer and saw a swimming pool in darn near every yard and on every building I looked down on. You telling me more of the little water we get to keep will be diverged to growth and swimming pools?

[cowgal]

ALL of the western states need to be slapped down for wasting water. That includes the eastern slope of Colorado. The areas that are siphoning off the western slope's water are arid by nature.

How about the humid bubble over Las Vegas from all the fountains!?! I hate going to Vegas for just that reason. It makes me boil when I see the horrific wastefulness of our water.

Getting back on track here - I don't believe discussions are bad. If nothing else, but to remind the other states that they MUST start conserving & changing their wasteful ways. A discussion does not mean its going to lead to having the water pact rewritten.

[CVC]

"whiskey is for drinking, water is for fightin'" No truer words have been said.

CO and KS have been fighting over water for quite some time now. Went all the way to the SCOTUS.

Water, in some areas of the country, is a finite resource. The Ogalala aquifer does not recharge so once it is gone, it is gone for good. People know this and some want to conserve and others want to mine it until it is gone.

The oil crisis is serious, but nothing compared to the potential water crisis some states will face in the future.

[civetcat]

Perhaps of more interest to this forum. On his way to a meating in the state the other day Senator McCain was interviewed by Colorado Matters the public radio program. When questioned about the Roan Plateau the senator replied that it's up to the states to decide what sort of oil development they want in thier state. Of course we know that's not true, BLM land and all. When the interviewer said that the governor, the senators, and every other Tom Dick and Harry in the stated doesn't want drilling there yet the feds are insisting,he backed up, issued platitudes, and the interview was suddenly over.

Some of the best elk and deer habitat in the state. Hunting groups are up in arms.

Sorry to branch off topic slightly. I've been looking for a transcript. Hope I paraphrased correctly.

[civetcat]

It does seem as if the west is trending back leftwards towards the center. Montana also has shifted and even Wyoming seems to be tacking out of R field

I'm an election judge. I live in what many would call a conservative county. Traditional cowboys. New voter registrations in since July 1 were 30,000 dems, 1500 republicans, and the day of voting in the primaries there was a lot of switching of parties. Heck I too used to be a registered Republican. There are more registered "unafiliated" than anything. Westerners are an unusual group. We generaly let our neighbors hold any religion, skin color, or beliefs they want and expect the same in return. We are slow to form opinions, especially bad ones, and will take a long hard look at something.

Lota old boys with boots and hats voting dem.

Yee haw

[cowgal]

civetcat wrote: When the interviewer said that the governor, the senators, and every other Tom Dick and Harry in the stated doesn't want drilling there yet

Just because the governor is against the drilling, does not make it a majority. Colorado and especially the western slope has benefited tremendously over the last few years from all the gas & oil exploration and drilling. So I don't know where you're getting your information. Yeah, Ritter has been very vocal and trying to shove his ideas down our throats on this side of the mountains. The drilling started before Ritter ever took office.

civetcat wrote: Some of the best elk and deer habitat in the state. Hunting groups are up in arms.
Should certain areas be off limits to drilling? Possibly. I believe it can be managed properly so energy companies and hunting can co-exist. And by the way, its not a lot of hunting groups up in arms, just a handful of outfitters that have leases on public land. The wildlife doesn't care about the drilling, they get along with it just fine.

And about the west trending to the left, I don't buy it. Maybe some areas that have had an influx of newcomers from more liberal states, but not the locals, and definitely not the old timers.

This may need to be split off into its own thread, since it has deviated from the original topic.

[bitmasher]

SoCo you are hopelessly partisan, where did McCain (in either of the links) or I (in the original post) say we wanted to give more Colorado water away? Knowingly or unknowingly you are a spin master.

Read the Chieftan article again, McCain specifically is quoted:

Quote:
"Let me make one thing perfectly clear: I would never advocate any course of action that would damage the state of Colorado's rights over the water, or any other water resources that is going to be one of the most precious commodities for Colorado and the entire West," the presidential hopeful said. "I would never support any policy or any federal role that would impair the state of Colorado or others state's rights to their resources. But I know there have been discussions amongst the governors. I encourage those discussions as to how we best use a scarcer and scarcer resource in the West."

I take McCain's position to mean that the compact should be renegotiated to get more federal and lower basin states to pay for water retention projects in the upper basin, of which McCain mentions that federal dollars could be found to help with the cost. This means more water storage (increased reservoir capacity) in the mountains and cloud seeding in the winter in the mountains, processes that produce a net increase in water available to the upper and lower basins, by trapping more snow and losing less to evaporation.

Your response like the DP response, shows the down fall to heavy partisanship. You serve the party before the general interest of the people, which creates a net negative for all.

Yes I knew (nor implied) that this was not a general DP article. It clearly says Opinion at the top and I mentioned it was by the DP "editors". Bob Ewegen is apparently a deputy editor. I'm not sure what you read regularly, but even in an op-ed I expect some semblance of rationalism and sticking to the facts. The DP's piece shows neither and is intentionally trying to fan the flames of hysteria.

[civetcat]

I did read the chieftan article and it said,"So the compact that is in effect, obviously, needs to be renegotiated over time amongst the interested parties,"

I know he went on to say all kinds of stuff about not hurting Colorado but I think the idea of renegotiating is what struck people funny.


I don't think those sprawlville states care about some cows in Colorado.

I think this whole water thing is a little bit wonkish for the Senator, he probably missed his nap.

BTW I like the revenue from the drilling leases, don't hunt that unit anyway.

[bitmasher]

Here is another DP piece that is a bit more fair, published today:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10254826

McCain says he was "misconstrued". I guess that is putting it modestly.

Anyway even the DP notes:

"Despite McCain's letter, Democrats heated up their criticism of McCain's comments, apparently seeing political traction in their criticisms."

Ritter and his crew are a clown show. Its no secret Colorado needs more funds for dams and water retention. Colorado doesn't have the money and he bats away any suggestion of reworking the compact (which would bring in more money) because it was suggested by a Republican candidate in an election year.

I'm willing to bet that if Obama had suggested the governors get together and talk water then it would have been hailed as .... ready now .... drum roll .... please: CHANGE.

[SoCoKHntr]

Either way you look at it, looks like he got worried he may lose some votes and is doing a little flip flopping.

This article is from the Chieftain:

McCain letter backs away from water statement

John McCain


Colorado Democratic leaders say they aren't buying it.
By CHARLES ASHBY
CHIEFTAIN DENVER BUREAU
DENVER - U.S. Sen. John McCain tried to back away from his comments that the Colorado River Water Compact should be renegotiated, but leading Colorado Democrats said they don't believe him.

In a letter sent to U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Colo., on Wednesday, McCain said he was not advocating renegotiating the 1922 compact, an agreement between Colorado and six other Western states allocating water from the Colorado River basin.

"My recent remarks may have been mistakenly construed as a call to rescind the Colorado River Compact and commence negotiations for new water allocations," McCain wrote to Allard. "Let me be clear that I do not advocate renegotiation of the compact."

In an interview with The Pueblo Chieftain last week, the presumptive GOP nominee for president said the compact needs to adjust to new realities of high growth and a water supply that is becoming increasingly scarce.

Gov. Bill Ritter and U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, both Democrats, said the bulk of that growth has been in California, Nevada and McCain's home state of Arizona. Opening up the compact would likely result in Colorado losing much of its water rights, they said. The two men said McCain has realized how politically explosive opening up the compact is for Colorado and the other upper basin states - New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming - and is trying to distance himself from the matter.

"I think the word, 'renegotiate,' does not have double meaning," Ritter said in a conference call with Salazar and the press on Wednesday. "It is about opening it up and negotiating it again, and the fact that he's willing to do that again has to demonstrate in my mind, given the context of it, a bias for the lower basin states. His desire still to renegotiate it . . . was really pretty direct."

McCain's comments created a firestorm in the state with Democrats and Republicans alike denouncing the notion, saying McCain could lose votes over it in Colorado and New Mexico, which have been called possible swing states in this year's presidential race between McCain and Democratic Sen. Barack Obama.

Ritter said that at best, McCain's letter to Allard showed him "flip-flopping" on the issue.

"The verbiage with The Pueblo Chieftain was very clear," he said. "This is a reversal of direction, but it's a reversal that I think Colorado voters have to pay clear attention to because on the West Slope, I'm not sure there are more important issues than the issue of the scarcity of water." In his Aug. 14 Chieftain interview, McCain said he encouraged the governors of the seven states to continue discussions on the issue, adding that the federal government should not try to force anything on them. He also said he respects Colorado water rights, and would do nothing to take them away. (See the link at the end of this story to hear what John McCain said in the Aug. 14 interview.)

He repeated those comments in his letter to Allard.

"I support constructive, continuing cooperation and dialogue among the states and the water users in a manner that is fully consistent with the compact," he wrote. "A federally driven scheme to reopen the compact would run afoul of my long-held respect for the importance of state law and local prerogatives in the allocation of water resources."

Salazar said the reason the compact was drafted in the first place was to protect the less politically powerful upper-basin states from the aggressive water policies of the lower states, particularly Southern California.

"The realities of population growth really were the impetus for the creation of the Colorado River compact," the senator said. "The upper basin states recognized that the lower basin states, lead by California, were going to far outgrow our growth. For Senator McCain to suggest that the changes in population growth now would require renegotiation of the contract essentially undercuts the very purpose for which the compact was created."

Regardless of McCain's letter to Allard, Democrats plan to continue making his comments a campaign issue. Ritter, Salazar and U.S. Rep. Mark Udall, the Democratic contender for U.S. Senate, are holding another press conference in Denver to talk about McCain's comments again.

Meanwhile, the issue has run through the West like a flash flood.

In Utah, Gov. Jon Huntsman, a Republican, told the Salt Lake City Tribune at a watershed symposium on Wednesday that he was open to the idea of renegotiating the compact as long as Western governors have a say.

In Arizona, Gov. Nancy Napolitano, a Democrat, told The Associated Press that she hoped McCain misspoke "because he obviously doesn't know that we actually went in and revised that compact and signed that agreement" in 2007.

On Tuesday, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who dropped out of the GOP presidential bid and is now stumping for McCain, told 9News in Denver that McCain had "no interest" in renegotiating the compact.

He told the Denver television station, however, that "down the road there may be changes and that states will come together to reconsider the settings at that point."