Irrigation communities of the upper Rio Grande bioregion: Sustainable resource use in the global context

Natural Resources Journal

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 1996, Pages 491-519

  Rivera, José A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 26244452815     PISSN: 00280739     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (66)

1. Río Declaration on Environment and Development, June 14, 1992, Principle 1, 31 I.L.M. 874, 876 (1992).
2. Id. at Principles 22, 23.
3. PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT, FINAL REPORT, White House Doc. (March, 1996).
4. See generally, ELINOR OSTROM, GOVERNING THE COMMONS: THE EVOLUTION OF INSTITUTIONS FOR COLLECTIVE ACTION (1990).
5. FIKRET BERKES, COMMON PROPERTY RESOURCES: ECOLOGY AND COMMUNITY-BASED SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 3-5 (1989).
6. MICHAEL REDCLIFT & COLIN SAGE, STRATEGIES FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: LOCAL AGENDAS FOR THE SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE (1994).
7. Id. at 11.
8. Id. at 188.
9. See OSTROM, supra note 4; see also BERKES, supra note 5; REDCLIFT & SAGE, supra note 6.
10. See Michael J. Rock, Anton Chico and Its Patent, in SPANISH & MEXICAN LAND GRANTS IN NEW MEXICO AND COLORADO 86-91 (John R. & Christine M. Van Ness eds., 1980).
11. IRA G. CLARK, WATER IN NEW MEXICO: A HISTORY OF MANAGEMENT AND USE 43 (1987).
12. DAVID H. GETCHES, WATER LAW IN A NUTSHELL 3-7 (1984).
13. See CLARK, supra note 11, at 15, 37, 41.
14. MARIA LUISA RODRIGUEZ-SALA ET AL., EXPLORADORES EN EL SEPTENTRION NOVOHISPANO 223 (1995).
15. For a review of acequia laws and ditch rules, see PHIL LOVATO, FOUR CORNERS REGIONAL COMM'N, TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 1, LAS ACEQUIAS DEL NORTE (1974).
16. ORGANIC LAW FOR THE TERRITORY OF NEW MEXICO COMPILED UNDER THE DIRECTIONS OF GENERAL KEARNY, in OCCUPATION OF MEXICAN TERRITORY, S. Doc. No. 896, 62d. Cong., 2d Sess. 10,175 (1912).
17. N.M. REVISED STATUTES AND LAWS (Studley 1865).
18. N.M. REVISED STATUTES AND LAWS 1865. Id.
19. N.M. STAT, ANN. § 72-5-23 (Michie 1978, Repl. Pamp. 1985 & Cum. Supp. 1996) (appropriation and use of surface water).
20. Id. § 72-5-5.
21. NORTHERN N.M. LEGAL SERVICES, SUMMARY OF EVENTS RELATING TO THE ACQUISITION OF WATER RIGHTS BY THE PECOS [RIVER] LEARNING CENTER (1992) (on file with N.N.M.L.S.).
22. Id. at 2.
23. State Engineer, Legal Notice, GUADALUPE COUNTY COMMUNICATOR, Nov. 25, 1993, at 9.
24. Legal Notice, GUADALUPE COUNTY COMMUNICATOR, 1993, 9. Id.
25. ROCK, supra note 10, at 87.
26. Interview with acequia officials at La Lorna Community Center in La Lorna, New Mexico (July 23, 1994).
27. Id.
28. Aaron Baca, State Nixes Water-Rights Sale, THE NEW MEXICAN, Aug. 31, 1994, at B3.
29. Aaron Baca, State Nixes Water-Rights Sale, THE NEW MEXICAN, 1994, B3. Id.
30. See Charles T. DuMars & Michele Minnis, New Mexico Water Law: Determining Public Welfare Values in Water Rights Allocation, 31 ARIZ. L. REV. 815, 828-30 (1989).
31. Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387 (1994).
32. National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4370 (1994).
33. Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1271-1287 (1994).
34. Endangered Species Act, 16 U.S.C. §§ 1531-1544 (1994).
35. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, WATER TRANSFERS IN THE WEST: EFFICIENCY, EQUITY, AND THE ENVIRONMENT 174-175 (1992).
36. See F. LEE BROWN & HELEN M. INGRAM, WATER AND POVERTY IN THE SOUTHWEST (1987).
37. Id. at 28-29.
38. Id. at 29, 44.
39. NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL, supra note 35, at 162, 175.
40. Reed F. Noss, A Sustainable Forest is a Diverse and Natural Forest, in CLEARCUT: THE TRAGEDY OF INDUSTRIAL FORESTRY 35, 37 (Bill DeVall ed., 1994).
41. Sylvia Rodriquez, Land, Water, and Ethnic Identity in Taos, in LAND, WATER, AND CULTURE 313, 356 (Charles L. Briggs & John R. Van Ness eds., 1987).
42. See Susan C. Nunn & Julie Urban, Equity: There is Always a Tradeoff 14 (Sept. 1989)
43. (unpublished manuscript on file with Natural Resources Journal).
44. See OSTROM, supra note 4; BERKES, supra note 5; Scott Whiteford & Luis E. Henao, Irrigation Descentralization, Desarrollo y Cambio Social, 40 AMERICA INDIGENA 52, 57-72 (1980).
45. Devon Peña, Cultural Landscapes and Biodiversity: The Ethnoecology of an Upper Río Grande Watershed Commons, Address at the Ethnoecology and Biodiversity Laboratory Conference 1 (Apr. 7-8, 1995)
46. (transcript on file with Natural Resources Journal).
47. Natural Resources Journal Id.
48. Natural Resources Journal Id.
49. John W. Powell, Institutions for the Arid Lands, 40 CENTURY 111, 112 (1890).
50. FREDERIC O. SARGENT ET AL., RURAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE COMMUNITIES 7, 63 (1991).
51. David Benavides, Written Testimony for the State Engineer Task Force 4 (Feb. 28, 1994) (unpublished testimony on file at Northern N. M. Legal Svcs., Inc.).
52. In re Application of Sleeper, 760 P.2d 787 (N.M. Ct. App. 1988), cert. quashed, Enseñada Land & Water Ass'n v. Sleeper, 759 P.2d 200 (N.M. 1988).
53. In re Sleeper, Rio Arriba County Cause No. RA 84-53 (c).
54. STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE, ANTON CHICO HISTORIC DISTRICT, STATE REGISTER NO. 541 at 18.
55. N.M. STAT. ANN. § 72-5-5(B) (Michie Repl. Pamp. 1985).
56. 63 Attorney General Opinion 63-112. At least two attorney general opinions since statehood have considered the question of whether community ditches are political subdivisions of the state of New Mexico. In 1940, the attorney general noted that the ditches had functioned for hundreds of years as rural water systems providing benefits to farmers similar to those that municipal water works provide to city dwellers, "both being of a benefit to the public and a necessity for the maintenance of health and life by the distribution of a publicly owned commodity, to-wit: water." Later in 1963, the attorney general was asked for a ruling on the specific question: are acequia association ditches political subdivisions? His reply was unequivocal: "Most certainly. . . . It is no exaggeration to state that community acequias have been serving as 'political subdivisions' in the area that now comprises the State of New Mexico since at least 1851." Report of the Attorney General, No. 63-112, at 247-252.
57. Guadalupe County, N.M., Resolution No. 07-94-14 (July 15, 1994).
58. See SAMUEL N. STOKES ET AL., SAVING AMERICA'S COUNTRYSIDE: A GUIDE TO RURAL CONSERVATION (1989).
59. Costilla County, CO, Resolution Designating Watershed Protection, No. 95-100 (June 23, 1995).
60. Devon G. Peña, GAIA in AZTLAN: CULTURE, ECOLOGY, AND POLITICS OF LOCALITY IN THE UPPER RIO GRANDE WATERSHED 32 (1994)
61. (unpublished manuscript on file with Natural Resources Journal).
62. The Bulletin Board, DIALOGUE, Oct. 1995, at 22, 23.
63. Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, Policies and Procedures, Rule 23, (Oct. 9, 1995).
64. N.M. STAT. ANN. § 72-12-8(D) (Michie Repl. Pamp. 1985 & Cum. Supp. 1996).
65. Gregory A. Thomas, Conserving Aquatic Biodiversity: A Critical Comparison of Legal Tools for Augmenting Stream Flows in California, 15 STAN. ENVTL. L.J. 3, 45-47 (1996).
66. Id. at 51.