<br />001675
<br />
<br />19
<br />
<br />
<br />Hon. J. BENNETT JOHNSTON, '
<br />Chairman, Committee on Energy and Natural Resources,
<br />U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
<br />DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is to present our views on S. 1415, the
<br />"Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1987."
<br />As you are aware, on December 10, 1986, the two Colorado Ute
<br />Tribes, the State of Colorado, several other parties and representa-
<br />tives of the Federal Government entered into a "Final Settlement
<br />Agreement" for the purpose of settling the outstanding water
<br />claims of the tribes on several streams in southwest Colorado. In
<br />this instance; as is typical in situations like this one, exercise ofthe
<br />1868 priority date of the tribes' Federal reserved water' rights
<br />claims could severely disrupt the existing regimen of water use on
<br />those streams, By way of compromise, and in an admirable display
<br />of community spirit, the tribes have agreed to forego this early pri-
<br />ority date in return for water supplied from the Dolores' and
<br />Animas-La Plata Projects,
<br />We support legislation to implement the December 10, 1986,
<br />Final Settlement Agreement, However, as presently drafted, S.
<br />1415 differs from the Final Settlement Agreement in several im-
<br />portant respects; We stand ready to work with the non-Federal par-
<br />ties on legislation consistent with our previous agreements regard-
<br />ing Ute Indian water rights and construction of the Animas-La
<br />Plata Project. ' . '
<br />We want to emphasize the interests we have had in pursuing the
<br />Animas-La Plata Project, This Administration has long had as a
<br />standard for new water projects that the projected long-term bene-
<br />fits of the project must at least equal its projected costs. Under this
<br />standard, the Animas-La Plata Project is not economically feasible
<br />at current discount rates although it would be consideredeconomi-
<br />cally feasible at its originally authorized discount, rate of 3,25 per-
<br />cent.
<br />,In evaluating this project, we have considered the benefit/cost
<br />standard, non-Federal cost-sharing, and water rights settlement
<br />concerns. We have, therefore, decided to participate in the Animas-
<br />La Plata Project because it combines Federal construction expendi-
<br />tures with non-Federal monies to produce a project that provides
<br />for water development and settles the Indian water claims.
<br />The Animas-La Plata Project will provide a ,means to satisfy the
<br />water claims of the Colorado Ute tribes, while leaving intact the
<br />historical uses already in place on these streams, As trustee for
<br />these tribes, the Department of the Interior desires to see the
<br />tribes establish secure and' valuable water rights that will be of
<br />true benefit to the tribes, rather than mere "paper" water rights,
<br />The project provides an opportunity to achieve these objectives,
<br />Without doubt, the single most controversial aspect of this bill is
<br />Indian water leasing, The bill provides for the tribes to have the
<br />opportunity to lease water provided by the settlement for off-reser-
<br />vation use both in the State of Colorado and out-of-state, We must
<br />emphasize here that the December 10, 1986, agreement provides for
<br />
<br />U,S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR,
<br />OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY,
<br />Washington, DC, October 19, 1987.
<br />
|