Transcript

Robert Matt: What sense of obligation needs to be retained in addressing impacts of the past?

I would like to put a little different perspective on the issue of water rights in the West. I come from an area -- the Colombia River basin -- where we provide the majority of the water for the downstream folks above Grand Coulee Dam. I am kind of perplexed by the longevity of the memory when it comes to the prior appropriation doctrine and history and the role that that plays in the future. I was wondering if the panel could maybe take some time to speak to the obligations of addressing the impacts of the past. Blockage of fish passages will be a very good example of that and the drive to provide power and water for alternative uses. Grand Coulee Dam was constructed and actually is one of the largest dams in the country, and it was constructed without any fish passage. So unfortunately, my people up there aren't able to look to the Endangered Species Act as a mechanism for promoting and retaining those cultural traditions. Also, I come from a part of the basin that has another watershed impacted by a century of mining. It is the Coeur d'Alene water basin -- it's virtually a sterile environment up there and the longevity of the memory of those who use the waters seem to stop when it comes to addressing the impacts that accessing that water have led to. And as people looking towards the future, I am curious how the panel thinks that aspect of history should be considered as we look to the future of water rights and water use issues and what sense of obligations need to be retained in addressing impacts of the past and even the present as we look to even an expanded use in capturing water for human needs into the future.

Back to Discussion page