BOARD01962

• Board Meeting Date: 3/22/2005
• Description: WSP Section - Navajo Nation Federal Reserved Water Right Settlement with the State of New Mexico
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

)

';'

.

.

.

Agenda Item 31
March 22-23,2005 Board Meeting
Page30f3

5. Does the proposed Settlement adversely affect Colorado water rights and Colorado's
Settlement with the Ute Tribes? New Mexico, the Navajo Nation and Jicarilla Nation have all
provided adverse comment on the Long Hollow Reservoir Project in Colorado suggesting that
the Long Hollow Project rnay adversely impact Indian trust assets, we suggest that the Navajo
Settlernent could adversely impact federal trust responsibilities under the Ute Tribes Settlement
and tribal lands in Colorado by agreeing to allow the Navajo Nation an 1868 priority on
significant portions of their claims. Such 1868 priority rights would not be subject to curtailment
in the event that curtailment of uses was ever required in the Upper Basin under the Colorado
River Compact. While the Colorado Ute Tribes received some 1868 water rights in their
settlement, most were subordinated to water rights with much more junior dates (generally 1970
or later). In contrast, all Navajo rights are 1868 unless they are associated with the Navajo
Indian Irrigation Project (1955), Navajo-Gallup (1955) and Animas-La Plata (1956). Thus, the
Navajo's would have an estimated 42,000 AF of depletion associated with 1868 priorities and
pussibl-e-moreifNavaju-R:es-ervuiris-everirreversibly lost;-"fhe Ute's received less than half that
amount with an 1868 priority after considering the various subordinations that they agreed too.

Conclusions

While achieving a settlement of the Navajo claims that keeps New Mexico's total depletions within
New Mexico's compact apportionments is extremely significant and helps maintain the integrity of
the Colorado and Upper Colorado River Compacts, such settlement does not come without certain
potential risks and impacts to Colorado water users. Briefly, the future risks and impacts include,
potential overuse of compact apportionment by New Mexico, potential for out-of state water
marketing by the Navajo's, possible impacts to HBC in the LCR, limited ability to satisfy any water
right claims by the Ute Mountain Ute's in New Mexico, and reductions in New Mexico's ability to
share in any curtailment of Upper Basin water use should such be required under the terms of the
compact.

Recommendations

Staff would like to recommend support ofthe proposed Navajo Settlement Agreements for the
benefits that are provided in terms of protecting the Colorado and Upper Colorado River Compacts.
However, staff is reluctant to do so because of the increased future risks to Colorado water users,
particularly in the event that Upper Basin curtailments in uses might some day be required. Staff
recommends that Colorado's congressional delegation be briefed on the pros and cons of the
proposed settlement and seek ways to reduce the potential impacts to Colorado once legislation is
introduced.

Attachment

Flood Protection' Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection
Water.Supply Protection. Conservation Planning