Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001127 <br /> <br />Testimony of Howard D. Richards, Sr., Chairman <br />Southern Ute Indian Tribe - March 24, 2004 <br />Page 3 <br /> <br />Education Assistance Act,' "to the same extent as if such functions were performed by the <br />Bureau of Indian AffairS." The only caveat was the section would not applyifit would <br />"detrimentally affect the construction schedules." <br /> <br />. Throughout the 1990's, the project sponsors and Reclamation sought to begin <br />construction of ALP but repeatedly ran into environmental problems involving the Endangered <br />Species Act and water quality issues related to the irrigation component of the project. <br />Following a series of public meetings over the fate of the project and the tribal water rights <br />settlement, the Department of the Interior proposed resolving the tribal claims through the <br />construction of a smaller project that would only serve municipal and industrial users and would <br />reflect the depletion limits imposed on the project under the Endangered Species Act Following <br />the development of another environmental impact statement compll!ing.the greatly reduced. ,.,.' , . . <br />'proJect'tCllhl: n()n~siructuial alternative advanced by the project opponents; the Secretary of the <br />Interior issued a record of decision fmding, among other things, that the reduced project was the <br />"environmentally preferred alternative" for settling the tribal claims." <br /> <br />In 2000. Congress enacted the Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of20007 which <br />authorized the settlement of the tribal claims through the construction of a smaller project that <br />would provide the tribes and water users in Colorado and New Mexico with statutory established <br />water allocations for municipal and industrial uses. The 2000 Amendments directed the <br />Attorney General of the United States to file the necessary papers with the Colorado Water Court <br />to extend the deadline by which the Tribes must return to court to secure their water rights. The <br />Attorney General has asked the Court to extend that deadline until 2012. <br /> <br />The Southern Ute Indian Tribe has worked closely with the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe,. <br />Reclamation. and the other project sponsors over the past three years to build the smaller project. <br /> <br />Reclamation's announcement last summer of the greatly increased cost estimate was a <br />shock and a disappointment For a variety of reasons, it is extremely important to build the <br />project in a cost-effective and timely fashion. In particular, the failure to build the project on <br />time would once more upset the settlement of the tribal water rights claims. It is also important <br />that our neighbors receive project water at a reasonable cost, consistent with their expectations at <br />the time that the 2000 Amendments were passed. <br /> <br />'25 V.S.C. ~9 450 to 458bbb-2 ("Self Determination Act") (frequently called "P.L. No. <br />93-638" or "638"). <br /> <br />"Record of Decision, Animas-La Plata Project/Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights <br />Settlement Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement July 2000 (Sept 25, 2000). <br /> <br />7Title III of Pub. 1. No. 106-554 (Dec. 21, 2000) ("2000 Amendments"). <br />