Laserfiche WebLink
<br />rights are negotiated instead of litigated. The Ute Tribes <br />received wet, usable water. They also obtained funding to <br />develop the water resources promised to them by the settlement. <br />Many barriers to full tribal use of reserved waters were removed, <br />such as the Nonintercourse Act and a reservation limitation on <br />the place of use of the water to within the reservations. In <br />turn, the State of Colorado and the non-Indian communities <br />received the benefit of protecting existing water uses, local <br />economies, and state water administration. The federal govern- <br />ment received a substantial state contribution, 39 percent, for <br />the settlement of the tribal reserved water right claims. All <br />parties received certainty: future change in use proceedings, <br />administrative proceedings, and coordinated use of the shared <br />water resource were negotiated and resolved. The settlement is a <br />model of successful cooperation and preservation of harmonious <br />Indian and non-Indian relations. <br />Unfortunately the settlement is also an example of the <br />vagaries of the negotiation process and the ever-changing climate <br />in which these settlements take place. Early on, necessary fed- <br />eral agencies were absent from the negotiation table. The par- <br />ties would reach an agreement only to find that a absentee fed- <br />eral agency would not accept the compromise. The United States <br />Fish and Wildlife Service ("FWS") nearly dealt the settlement its <br />coup de grace last May by issuing an eleventh-hour draft biologic <br /> <br />-2- <br />