You're a cannabis grower? Well, no water for you! (Denver: 2015, house)

[Colorado Rambler]

I never realized the Bureau of Reclamation could be so devious. But then they ARE a Federal Agency so why should I be surprised? Today the Bureau issued some new guidelines about the use to which the water it controls may be put. To wit: The Bureau of Reclamation will not allow federally controlled water to be used to grow marijuana in Colorado and Washington. A Colorado water blog (Coyote Gulch) reprinted this late breaking news from the Pueblo Chieftain and the Huffington Post among other sources:

“As a federal agency, Reclamation is obligated to adhere to federal law in the conduct of its responsibilities to the American people...

“Reclamation will operate its facilities and administer its water-related contracts in a manner that is consistent with the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, as amended. This includes locations where state law has decriminalized or authorized the cultivation of marijuana. Reclamation will refer any inconsistent uses of federal resources of which it becomes aware to the Department of Justice and coordinate with the proper enforcement authorities. Reclamation will continue to work with partner water districts and providers to ensure their important obligations can continue to be met.”

While Denver is not impacted by this decision since they are not a Federal Contractor, other Colorado towns like Pueblo will be affected because they have federal contracts such as the one Pueblo has for storage in Lake Pueblo. Pueblo also has direct flow rights that pass through Pueblo Dam, as well as a contract for connection to the dam.

Hmmm... Now what?

[Littlekw]

I had a feeling this was coming. I work for a restaurant that does the occassional banquet and provides a meeting place for a group that is trying to put the regulation of marijuana in the hands of the voters. One of their recent meetings touched on the subject of using Pueblo Reservoir water to cultivate marijuana or industrial hemp. They saw this problem of using "federal" water to grow being a problem. I had hoped it wouldn't turn into that but it apparently has. But the banking system was a problem at first and is being rectified. We're treading new ground here and have to work out the kinks. As much as I disagree with the federal government on this, maybe we can find a way to work it out with them like we did with the banking issue.

[ELCO5280]

Maybe good ol' Monsanto can come up with a drought, pesticide resistant marijuana plant... I'm sure the State can get behind that since they have no problem feeding that crap to us through other sources.

[CosmicWizard]

ELCO5280 wrote: Maybe good ol' Monsanto can come up with a drought, pesticide resistant marijuana plant... I'm sure the State can get behind that since they have no problem feeding that crap to us through other sources.

Mon-satan-o has likely already developed GMO weed, and the CO government is probably on board to use it.

[Colorado Rambler]

^^^

Yeah, they probably developed a drought resistant strain to get around Reclamation's rules. The only problem is that the new cannabis strain now carries a segment of cactus DNA. Watch out for those spines, guys!

[Idunn]

Originally Posted by Colorado Rambler

... While Denver is not impacted by this decision since they are not a Federal Contractor, other Colorado towns like Pueblo will be affected because they have federal contracts such as the one Pueblo has for storage in Lake Pueblo.

Maybe not. Denver water controls the water within Lake Dillon (reservoir) in Summit County. The waters feeding it, such as Tenmile Creek, the Blue and Snake rivers, all originate in adjacent federal national forests and wilderness areas. So, if wishing to get really technical about this, who knows how far they might go?

For that matter, I'm not even sure the Dillon Dam was not funded with a good deal of federal money. The Alva B. Adams diversion tunnel running from Grand Lake to near Estes Park is part of the federal Colorado-Big Thompson water diversion project. Moreover the source of the diverted water derives within Rocky Mountain National Park. That goes as well for all the diverted water running down the Cache la Poudre River, sourced via the Grand Ditch within RMNP. In looking at this closely one could probably define most of the water used by the Front Range as having originated on federal land—often delivered via projects funded wholly or in part by the federal government.

If they want to get picky about this, particularly in opting to prosecute anyone, this should take water contention in Colorado and the West to a whole new level, and indeed more or less war.

[Colorado^]

Glad my tax dollars are not being wasted trying to circumvent the will of the voters.

[robertgoodman]

The policy basically amounts to don't ask don't tell for marijuana, and if you do tell all they will do is report it to the DOJ which goes back to the guidelines Cole memo. If they find out water is used for marijuana cultivation they will report it to the DOJ, if you ask for explicit approval to use it for marijuana they will say no, but they aren't going to enforce it (although the water agencies could voluntarily decide to or the DOJ could change their mind and enforce it). Pueblo is co-mingled water and under the proposed policy in item 6 co-mingled water does not apply, and most water districts in CO are that way.

It's a lot of media sensationalism but at it's core it's just one government agency covering it's ass -by reporting it to the DOJ- so they have political cover in case the next administration asks why they didn't do anything to stop this.

[jazzlover]

I applaud the Bureau of Reclamation for having the courage to stand up and actually obey the laws under which it operates. People should consider it refreshing when a Federal agency actually does what the Federal laws under which it operates mandates it to do. This should set a precedent that ALL federal agencies associated with agriculture--USDA, NRCS, etc.--should follow. I would suspect that the CSU Extension Service will also be treading very lightly on MJ now, since it gets substantial Federal funding.

If the pro-MJ crowd is stupid enough to make one peep about this in the Federal Courts, it will likely open the door for a ruling of the legality of Colorado's MJ legalization initiative by the Federal Courts--a case that the pro-MJ crowd will almost certainly lose.

Another interesting sidebar will be if a farmer or rancher with a water right junior to an MJ grower's water right, with both getting water from a BOR project, sues on the premise that he is being denied water while the MJ grower is using BOR-derived water in an illegal manner.

[DurangoJoe]

This isn't a big issue in Colorado. Most MJ here is grown indoors anyway. This is a minor inconvenience and is a quite idiotic move by the government. Granted, BLM is playing it safe by toeing the line, but it is very much in line with so much of the "war on drugs" mentality that pervades the DEA & the early 20th century "thinkers" in Congress. They give lip service to not wanting the black market to exist yet will bend over backwards to hurt the legal markets. They know that if they killed the legal markets tomorrow, the black market that would thrive. But that old "war on drugs" mentality is pervasive to the point of mass addiction given the amount of money involved in maintaining the status quo. Sadly, it's always about the benjamins.

Their time is coming soon. The legal cannabis lobby is growing and voter approval levels of legal MJ are too high to ignore. Legislators are slowly beginning to understand that opposition to legal MJ does not help them win elections. There are currently several bills circulating in the house (HR-499, HR-1523) that will force the DOJ & DEA to maintain a "hands off" position in states that have legalized MMJ. Similar bills have been introduced before but have always lost, by progressively smaller margins with every vote. We are however reaching a tipping point where we will most likely see approval by the end of 2015. Both bills are still in committee and are picking up momentum as more legislators begin to open their eyes to the futility of the last 77 years of prohibition.