Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />12 <br /> <br />tor McClure and Senator Wallop explained the reason for <br />their amendment as "the need to reject the assertion that <br />a waiver of the Indian Intercourse Act is sufficient to <br />sever the nexus between a Federal reserved water right <br />and the land reserved, A Fetleralreserved water right <br />arises solely where the failure to secure water would utter- <br />ly defeat the purpose for which the lands were reserved. <br />The suggestion that the water is, no longer needed for the <br />land defeats the only justification for the right to exist at <br />all." The Committee then adopted the amendment, The <br />Committee has no objection to the relinquishment of a <br />Federal reserved right for a State water right which may <br />prove to be more. advantageous either in terms of the pur- <br />poses or places of use. ThesubsectioIl makes it clear that <br />the State water rights which are confirmed by the Agree- <br />ment as modified by the Act are fully subject to the Law of <br />the River and that the term Federal'law also includes all <br />court decrees, including Arizona Y. California. ' <br />3. The third amendment provides that the Agreement is <br />to be construed in a manner consistent with the provisions <br />, of this Act and that the Agreement is modified according- <br />ly. The Act makes it clear that the water secured to the <br />Tribes is State water and fully subject to the Law of the <br />River as with any other Colorado State water right. Any <br />suggestion to the contrary in the Agreement is expressly <br />rejected, The amendment also provides that the Act and <br />the Agreement relate only to the parties to the Agreement <br />, and the Agreement does not affect the rights of any par- <br />ties not signatory to the Agreement. ' <br />4. The fourth amendment was offered at the request of <br />the Tribes and the State of Colorado to ensure that if they <br />were satisfied with the agreement as finally enacted the <br />United States would not exercise its option to vQid the <br />agreement. The Committee concurs in the request and be- <br />lieves that the Tribes and the non-federal parties should <br />have the option upon enactment to either concur in the <br />settlement or continue the litigation. The agreement as <br />modified and confirmed by this Act is the position of the <br />United States ahd no Federal agency should have the <br />option of voiding that position, <br /> <br />SECTION-BY-SECTIONANALYSIS <br /> <br />The following section by section analysis is of S, 1415 as intro- <br />duced and referred to the two Committees. Both Committees have <br />recommended amendments to various sections. The following dis- <br />cussion indicates where an amendment was recommended and by <br />which (or by both) Committees, Unless otherwise indicated in the <br />discussion of the amendments, the following description represents <br />the views of the two Committees, <br /> <br />Section 1. Short title <br /> <br />The section provides that the bill may be called Colorado Ute <br />Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1987, <br /> <br />,- <br />