    [House Hearing, 106 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

    H.R. 3112, TO AMEND THE COLORADO UTE INDIAN WATER RIGHTS SETTLEMENT ACT
      TO PROVIDE FOR A FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIMS OF THE COLORADO UTE
                     INDIAN TRIBES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON WATER AND POWER

                                     of the

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                          MAY 11, 2000, WASHINGTON, DC

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 106-92

                                   __________

               Printed for the use of the Committee on Resources

     Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/
                                     house
                                       or
               Committee address: http://www.house.gov/resources

                                     ______

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    67-697                     WASHINGTON : 2000

                             COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES

                          DON YOUNG, Alaska, Chairman
    W.J. (BILLY) TAUZIN, Louisiana       GEORGE MILLER, California
    JAMES V. HANSEN, Utah                NICK J. RAHALL II, West Virginia
    JIM SAXTON, New Jersey               BRUCE F. VENTO, Minnesota
    ELTON GALLEGLY, California           DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
    JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee       PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
    JOEL HEFLEY, Colorado                ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American
    JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California            Samoa
    WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland         NEIL ABERCROMBIE, Hawaii
    KEN CALVERT, California              SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
    RICHARD W. POMBO, California         OWEN B. PICKETT, Virginia
    BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming               FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
    HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho          CALVIN M. DOOLEY, California
    GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California     CARLOS A. ROMERO-BARCELO, Puerto
    WALTER B. JONES, Jr., North              Rico
        Carolina                         ROBERT A. UNDERWOOD, Guam
    WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY, Texas   PATRICK J. KENNEDY, Rhode Island
    CHRIS CANNON, Utah                   ADAM SMITH, Washington
    KEVIN BRADY, Texas                   CHRIS JOHN, Louisiana
    JOHN PETERSON, Pennsylvania          DONNA MC CHRISTENSEN, Virgin
    RICK HILL, Montana                       Islands
    BOB SCHAFFER, Colorado               RON KIND, Wisconsin
    JIM GIBBONS, Nevada                  JAY INSLEE, Washington
    MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana              GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
    GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  TOM UDALL, New Mexico
    DON SHERWOOD, Pennsylvania           MARK UDALL, Colorado
    ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina          JOSEPH CROWLEY, New York
    MIKE SIMPSON, Idaho                  RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
    THOMAS G. TANCREDO, Colorado

                         Lloyd A. Jones, Chief of Staff
                       Elizabeth Megginson, Chief Counsel
                  Christine Kennedy, Chief Clerk/Administrator
                    John Lawrence, Democratic Staff Director
                                     ------

                   Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources

                    JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, California, Chairman
    KEN CALVERT, California              CALVIN M. DOOLEY, California
    RICHARD W. POMBO, California         GEORGE MILLER, California
    HELEN CHENOWETH-HAGE, Idaho          PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon
    GEORGE P. RADANOVICH, California     OWEN B. PICKETT, Virginia
    WILLIAM M. (MAC) THORNBERRY, Texas   ADAM SMITH, Washington
    GREG WALDEN, Oregon                  DONNA MC CHRISTENSEN, Virgin
    MIKE SIMPSOM, Idaho                      Islands
                                         GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
                      Robert Faber, Staff Director/Counsel
                       Joshua Johnson, Professional Staff
                          Steve Lanich, Minority Staff

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held May 11, 2000........................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Doolittle, Hon. John T., a Representative in Congress from
          the State of California....................................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     1
        McInnis, Hon. Scott, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Colorado, prepared statement of...................     4

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Baker, Jr., John E., Chairman, Southern UTE Indian Tribe,
          Ignacio, Colorado..........................................    23
            Prepared statement of....................................    25
        Hayes, David J., Deputy Secretary, Department of Interior,
          Washington, DC.............................................     2
            Prepared statement of....................................    10
        House, Chairman, Ernest, UTE Mountain UTE Tribe, Towaoc,
          Colorado...................................................    33
            Prepared statement of....................................    35
        Remington, Sage Douglas, Director, Southern UTE Grassroots
          Organization, Ignacio, Colorado............................    39
            Prepared statement of....................................    41

    Additional Material Supplied:
        Black, Michael, with Taxpayers for the Animas River, prepared
          statement of...............................................    65
        Griswold, Richard K., President of the Animas-La Plata Water
          Conservancy District, prepared statement of................    46
        Kroeger, Fred V., President of the Southwestern Water
          Conservation District, prepared statement of...............    61
        San Juan Water Commission in New Mexico, prepared statement
          of.........................................................    56
        Turney, Thomas C., State Engineer with the State of New
          Mexico, prepared statement of..............................    52

     HEARING ON: H.R. 3112, TO AMEND THE COLORADO UTE INDIAN WATER RIGHTS
     SETTLEMENT ACT TO PROVIDE FOR A FINAL SETTLEMENT OF THE CLAIMS OF THE
               COLORADO UTE INDIAN TRIBES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES

                                  ----------

                             THURSDAY, MAY 11, 2000

                      House of Representatives,
                       Subcommittee on Water and Power,
                                        Committee on Resources,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to other business, at 2:48
    p.m., in room 1334, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. John
    T. Doolittle (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

       STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN T. DOOLITTLE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                 CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

        Mr. Doolittle. We will now proceed to the hearing on
    Animas-La Plata. I thank the members. Let me invite our
    witnesses to come forward. This is a legislative hearing on
    H.R. 3112.
        May I ask you to please rise and raise your right hands. Do
    you solemnly swear or affirm under the penalty of perjury that
    the testimony given will be the whole truth and nothing but the
    truth?
        Mr. Hayes. I do.
        Mr. Baker. I do.
        Mr. House. I do.
        Mr. Remington. I do.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you. Let the record reflect that each
    answered affirmatively. We are very happy to welcome you here,
    gentlemen, and we will begin hearing from the Deputy Secretary
    of Interior, Mr. David Hayes. Welcome.
        [The prepared statement of John T. Doolittle follows]

    Statement of Hon. John T. Doolittle, a Representative in Congress from
                            the State of California

        H.R. 3023, Greater Yuma Port Authority
        H.R. 4132, Water Resources Research Act
        S. 1211, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act

    Legislative Hearing on:

        H. R. 3112, ``to amend the Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights
    Settlement Act to provide for a final settlement of the claims
    of the Colorado Ute Indian Tribes, and for other purposes.
        Today we will first markup the following three bills,
    followed by a legislative hearing on H.R. 3112, the Animas La
    Plata Project. The bills to markup include:

        1.  H.R. 3023, Greater Yuma Port Authority

        To convey to the Greater Yuma Port Authority an area of
    land currently controlled by the Bureau of Reclamation
    consisting of approximately 330 acres, at fair market value,
    just east of the City of San Luis, for the construction of a
    commercial Port of Entry.

        2.  H.R. 4132, Water Resources Research Act

        To reauthorize grants for water resources research and
    technology institutes established under the Water Resources
    Research Act of 1984.
        These state water resource research institutes, under the
    authority of the Water Resources Research Act, have established
    an effective federal/state partnership in water resources,
    education and information transfer. They work with state and
    federal agencies and water resources stakeholders in their home
    states while acting as a network for the exchange of water
    resources research and information transfer among the states. I
    am pleased that among the 17 cosponsors we already have, many
    of them are members of this Subcommittee, on both sides of the
    aisle. I look forward to the rest of you joining us in
    cosponsoring this bill.

        3.  S. 1211, Colorado River Basin Salinity Control Act

        To increase the current Colorado River Basin Salinity
    Control Act authorization from $75 million to $175 million. In
    addition, the legislation requires the secretary to file a
    report to address salt contributions from Bureau of Land
    Management lands.
        Prior to 1995, Reclamation's efforts to reduce salinity
    were costing between $70 to more than $100 for each ton of salt
    that was controlled. One of the important steps we took in
    reforming this program in 1996 was the introduction of private
    parties and the use of market forces to bring those costs down.
    It is a testament to the use of entrepreneurial methods that I
    can now report that costs for salt removal are around $30 per
    ton. In addition, for every $100 spent by the federal
    government, an additional $43 is spent by the Basin States.
        H.R. 3112, an amendment to ``the Colorado Ute Indian Water
    Rights Settlement Act to provide for a final settlement of the
    claims of the Colorado Ute Indian Tribes.''
        Two years ago, this Subcommittee held a hearing to address
    issues raised by the Romer-Schoettler process regarding what
    direction to take with the Animas La Plata Project, and to hear
    testimony from project proponents, opponents, and the
    Administration. During the hearing, then Counselor to the
    Secretary of the Interior, David Hayes indicated the desire of
    the Administration to address additional issues. On August 11,
    1998, the Secretary of Interior presented an Administration
    Proposal to implement the Settlement Act. H.R. 3112 is an
    attempt by project beneficiaries to implement these
    negotiations and come to a final Settlement Act.
        Since the hearing the Tribes, and other project
    beneficiaries have agreed to a much smaller ALP Project. In
    fact, if you consider the full cost of project, as anticipated
    in 1968, in 1999 dollars, the project would have an estimated
    price of $754 million. The bill before us today, specifically
    regarding the ALP project, is estimated to costs between $180
    and $240 million. This is a drastic reduction in the project
    cost.
        I commend the Project beneficiaries for their continuing
    flexibility to work with the Administration to draft
    legislation that meets their demands, and one that provides an
    equitable settlement to the tribes. I would also just like to
    note the municipal and industrial water beneficiaries
    commitment to fully fund their portion of the capital
    investment--in full and up front.
        I look forward to hearing the testimony and discussing the
    issues with the witnesses.

     STATEMENT OF DAVID J. HAYES, DEPUTY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF
                       INTERIOR, WASHINGTON, DC.

        Mr. Hayes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
    committee. I have submitted a written statement that I would
    appreciate being entered into the record, Mr. Chairman.
        In my oral comments, I would like to just briefly review
    some of the highlights of what has brought us here to this
    hearing today on H.R. 3112. This hearing, as the chairman noted
    at the outset, is on a bill that is intended to provide a final
    settlement for the claims of the Colorado Ute Indian Tribes in
    Southwestern Colorado and Northern New Mexico. Those remaining
    claims exist in the Animas and La Plata river basins in
    Southeastern Colorado and their resolution also requires a
    resolution of issues associated
        with the Animas-La Plata project that was originally
    authorized in 1968 and which has not been built. We are very
    interested in resolving these very difficult issues once and
    for all and we thank Congressman McInnis for introducing the
    bill.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. McInnis follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.001

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.002

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.003

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.004

        Mr. Hayes. The administration supports H.R. 3112 with some
    modifications that are identified in my testimony. The reason
    we support passage of this legislation is that we feel strongly
    that it is time to resolve the longstanding claims of the
    Colorado Ute Tribes, the Southern Utes and the Mountain Utes.
    In 1986, Congress passed the Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights
    Final Settlement Agreement, which identified the legal rights
    of the two tribes to reserve water under the Winters doctrine.
    It anticipated that those legal rights would be implemented
    through the construction of the Animas-La Plata project that
    originally was authorized in 1968.
        Unfortunately, however, that project could not be
    implemented in the form in which it was authorized in 1968,
    and, in fact, this administration identified serious problems
    both with the original project and also with the project
    commonly known as ``ALP Lite'', which emerged out of the Romer-
    Schoettler process that the chairman referred to earlier in his
    comments. The administration was concerned that even ALP Lite
    was too large a project, raised significant environmental
    concerns and financial concerns.
        Yet Secretary Babbitt and the administration appreciated
    the fact that it was necessary to bring closure to the tribal
    water rights and we proposed in August 1998 that a further
    scaled-down project that was geared toward the tribal water
    right proceed for full environmental review. That review has
    been undertaken and it is because the review has been
    undertaken with full public process that we are here today
    believing it is time to go forward and write the final chapter
    of Animas-La Plata.
        The bill that Congressman McInnis has introduced is, in
    essence, a consensus bill among the tribes, the administration,
    and the project proponents. It eliminates the irrigation
    component of the original ALP project, which was a serious
    concern for environmental purposes and also cost effectiveness
    purposes. It is a much scaled-down reservoir, off-stream
    facility, that still allows the Animas River to remain free-
    flowing.
        Thirdly, it incorporates non-structural concepts and
    anticipates that the tribes will purchase some of their water
    rights while also having a structural facility for certainty
    for the bulk of their water rights. And it is premised on full
    environmental review, full implementation under the Endangered
    Species Act and under NEPA. And it finally anticipates that
    some water would be available for municipalities in the area,
    but only unsubsidized water for M&I uses only.
        And most importantly, it will finally resolve the Ute
    Tribes' water rights. We think that is important not only
    because of the trust responsibility that we owe to the tribes,
    but also because resolution of those water rights will avoid
    the uncertainty of water rights in the entire Southwestern
    Colorado and Northern New Mexico area. If we do not bring
    closure here, the Settlement Act of 1968 will go by the
    wayside, litigation will commence, and potentially very
    significant senior water rights claims will be brought against
    current non-Indian water users in Southern Colorado and
    Northern New Mexico. We think a consensual solution along the
    lines of what has been developed among the parties and with the
    administration's help as reflected in Congressman McInnis's
    bill is the way to go.
        A final point, we do think it is important to deauthorize
    the ALP project and make it clear that this is the final
    chapter. We also think it is important to reflect the concept
    of full repayment for the M&I users. We think there is a way to
    do this that will be consistent with the needs of the water
    users and the interests of all parties.
        Finally, I will note that an important feature of this bill
    and the administration's proposal is a drinking water pipeline
    for the Navajo Nation between Farmington and Shiprock, a much
    needed replacement of an important municipal water supply that
    the current pipeline of which has lived beyond its useful life.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing and
    providing the opportunity to testify.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Hayes follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.005

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.006

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.007

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.008

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.009

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.010

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.011

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.012

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.013

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.014

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.015

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.016

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.017

        Mr. Doolittle. We are in the middle of a vote, but I think
    we have time to take the testimony of one more person before
    that happens, so we will hear from Mr. John E. Baker, Jr.,
    chairman of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, Ignacio, Colorado.

    STATEMENT OF JOHN E. BAKER, JR., CHAIRMAN, SOUTHERN UTE INDIAN
                        TRIBE, IGNACIO, COLORADO

        Mr. Baker. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
    thank each and every one of you for allowing me this
    opportunity to speak on behalf of my tribe.
        Good afternoon. My name is John E. Baker, Jr. I am the
    chairman of the Southern Ute Indian Tribe. On behalf of the
    tribe and the Tribal Council, I offer unqualified support for
    the enactment of H.R. 3112. We hope that the bill can be
    promptly enacted into law.
        Last fall, I was elected chairman of the tribe on a
    platform that included a new approach to tribal government. A
    lot has changed since I took office, but one thing has not, the
    strong support for the Animas-La Plata project. ALP is the only
    way to provide the tribe with a water supply to meet its
    present and future needs. The Tribal Council continues to
    support ALP just as a prior Tribal Council did when my father,
    John E. Baker, Jr., was chairman, just as the council did when
    my uncle, Chris A. Baker, Sr., was chairman, just as the
    council did when my predecessor, Clement J. Frost, was
    chairman, and just as the council did during the many years of
    leadership under Leonard C. Burch.
        The Tribal Council is elected to lead the Southern Ute
    Indian Tribe. Over the years, the council has sought a firm and
    reliable supply of water to serve as the foundation for tribal
    economic growth and we as we move into the new century. The
    present council, like past councils, understands that economic
    success in the arid Southwest requires a dependable water
    supply. Water will be needed whether the future of the Southern
    Ute Indian Tribe includes continued success in natural resource
    development or reflects the recreation and tourist industry
    that is now an important part of the economy of the Four
    Corners region. With an ever-growing tribal membership, we also
    need houses and domestic water supply on the west side of our
    reservation no matter what economic enterprises the tribe
    ultimately undertakes.
        Based on the studies of the draft EIS, we know that storage
    is required to provide the tribe with a firm and flexible
    supply of water. The United States promised that the tribe
    would have such a water supply in 1868 when it created the Ute
    Reservation. It confirmed that promise in 1988 when it passed
    the Colorado Ute Indian Water Rights Settlement Act in 1988,
    102 Stat. 2973. Now is the time for the United States to carry
    out those commitments.
        The project that would be constructed under the present
    legislation is much different than the originally proposed ALP.
    It is much different than Phase I of the project which was to
    be constructed under the terms of the 1986 Settlement Agreement
    and the 1988 Settlement Act. It is also much different than the
    ALP Lite project, which was proposed only 2 years ago. All of
    the changes that have been made respond to arguments by the
    project opponents.
        First of all, the project is now unquestionably an Indian
    water rights project.
        Second, the major environmental issues associated with
    irrigation and the Endangered Species Act have been eliminated
    by downsizing the project.
        Third, the cost of the project has been greatly reduced.
        Fourth, the proposed legislation contains no short cut to
    environmental compliance.
        Despite these major changes to the project, there is still
    opposition. The opponents would oppose any water project, no
    matter how small its impact and no matter who gets the
    benefits. Congress should not be swayed by the arguments that
    are raised against the project but should move forth to carry
    out the promises made to the two Ute Tribes. The bill is still
    a good solution to a very difficult problem. It should be
    passed.
        In closing, Mr. Chairman, I want to express my appreciation
    for your work on this matter. I also want to note Congressman
    McInnis's leadership on this difficult issue. We appreciate his
    hard work and support.
        Finally, we want to say thank you to Secretary Babbitt,
    Deputy Secretary Hayes, and the Department of the Interior for
    their work on these matters. We also want to state our
    appreciation for the sacrifices made by our non-Indian
    neighbors who have never wavered in their insistence that the
    United States should honor its commitments to the two Ute
    Tribes.
        In closing, I sit here as a veteran of this country and I
    believe that we live in the greatest country of the world and I
    think it is only honorable that we honor the agreements made
    between the United States and the Southern Ute Indian Tribe.
    Thank you.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Baker follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.018

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.019

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.020

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.021

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.022

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.023

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.024

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.025

        Mr. Doolittle. The committee will now recess for the votes,
    which I think there are two, so we should be back here in about
    20 minutes.
        [Recess.]
        Mr. Doolittle. The subcommittee will reconvene and we will
    hear from Mr. Ernest House, chairman of the Ute Mountain Tribe
    in Colorado. Mr. House?

     STATEMENT OF ERNEST HOUSE, CHAIRMAN, UTE MOUNTAIN UTE TRIBE,
                            TOWAOC, COLORADO

        Mr. House. My name is Ernest House, Sr. I am the tribal
    chairman for the Ute Mountain Ute Tribe. I am honored to
    testify today in support of H.R. 3112, the Colorado Ute
    Settlement Act Amendment of 1999.
        It is difficult to describe my tribe's long-term commitment
    to obtain a fair and just settlement of our water claims in
    Southwest Colorado and Northwest New Mexico. I thought the best
    way to do so might be to introduce you to my father, Thomas
    House, Sr., who served on the Ute Mountain Ute Tribal Council
    more than a quarter of a century ago.
        I also wanted to demonstrate to the chairman and members of
    the committee that the real reason we have remained so
    committed in spite of the many years which have passed and
    delays which have been endured. The Ute Mountain Tribe and our
    sister tribe, Southern Utes, entered into a settlement and have
    patiently waited for its implementation for the future of our
    tribe. Joining me today are my son and daughter, the picture of
    our future generation who will benefit from this firm supply of
    water. I ask you to welcome my son, Ernest House Jr. and my
    daughter, Michelle House.
        I was a young tribal member, like them, in 1968 when my
    grandfather, the late Chief Jack House appeared before the
    House Interior and Insular Affairs to testify in support of the
    Animas-La Plata project. I was also a tribal chairman in 1986
    when the Southern Ute Tribe and Ute Mountain Ute Tribe signed
    the original settlement agreement with the State of Colorado.
    The agreement eventually became the Colorado Ute Indian Water
    Rights Settlement Act of 1988, which was passed by Congress and
    signed into law by President Ronald Reagan. Needless to say,
    the Ute Mountain Ute people rejoiced with the Southern Ute
    people and our non-Indian neighbors because we thought we had
    finally won the long battle to acquire a firm water supply to
    meet the present and future needs of our Indian people of
    Southwest Colorado.
        Two years ago when we came before the subcommittee in
    support of legislation to implement the Colorado Ute Indian
    Water Rights Settlement Act, the Clinton administration refused
    to support our cause. Today, however, I understand, hopefully,
    that the Clinton administration will support H.R. 3112, along
    with the State of Colorado, New Mexico, and sister tribe, the
    Southern Ute Indians. H.R. 3112 will provide for the final
    settlement of the water rights claims of the Southern Ute
    Indian and Ute Mountain Ute Tribes in Southwestern Colorado.
    The legislation creates substantial new water supply to the Ute
    Tribes and supplemental supplies to the non-Indian communities
    in our area.
        We urge you to promptly consider and approve the
    legislation so that at the conclusion of our environmental
    process, the Secretary of the Interior can move forward with a
    record of decision and construction of this crucially needed
    water supply project.
        As a tribal leader on the national, State, and local level
    for several years, I have witnessed on many occasions major
    confrontation and battles between Indians and non-Indians on
    various issues affecting tribal sovereignty, tribal natural
    resources, social and economic issues.
        Finally, I would like to thank on behalf of the Ute
    Mountain Ute tribe and our other tribal and non-tribal partners
    in Colorado and New Mexico, both the Congress and the Clinton
    administration for their leadership. Through the efforts
    undertaken different times with different styles, a commitment
    has emerged from both the U.S. Congress and the Clinton
    administration to resolve once and for all this lengthy
    struggle to find a legally and scientifically supportive
    solution. We are indeed fortunate that the elected leaders from
    the tribes, La Plata and Montezuma Counties, and the States of
    Colorado and New Mexico, and elected and non-elected officials
    in Denver and Washington, DC., have put aside their differences
    and worked to develop a rational and equitable solution.
        It is time to move forward. I want my father to see this
    project in his lifetime and I am hopeful my children will be
    able to focus their efforts on other important tribal issues
    and will not 10 years from now be sitting here where I am today
    asking for the water for my people.
        I thank you, Chairman, for the time that you have allowed
    me. Also, for the record, I would like to say that the State of
    Colorado has submitted their support and it is in the record,
    to let the committee know that the State of Colorado also
    supports the water project. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. House follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.026

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.027

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.028

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.029

        Mr. Doolittle. Our next witness is Mr. Sage Douglas
    Remington, Director of the Southern Utes Grassroots
    Organization from Colorado. I might note, it is my
    understanding that Mr. Remington has been quite ill and has
    spent a good deal of time here today waiting for us to get
    through this hearing, so we hope you are feeling better and I
    appreciate your patience. Mr. Remington?

      STATEMENT OF SAGE DOUGLAS REMINGTON, DIRECTOR, SOUTHERN UTE
               GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATION, IGNACIO, COLORADO

        Mr. Remington. Thank you. My name is Sage Douglas Remington
    and I am a representative of the Southern Ute Grassroots
    Organization, which represents Southern Ute Tribal members who
    are deeply concerned about the Animas-La Plata project and its
    long-term effect on water resources of the Southern Ute Tribe.
        First of all, a number of groups that are concerned about
    the ALP water project are not present because verbal testimony
    has been limited to one representative. Therefore, I am not in
    a position to address or cover their issues of concern.
        Our main concern is that there has been little
    communication between the Southern Ute Tribal membership and
    the Tribal Council about the long-term benefits of the Animas-
    La Plata water project. We are not opposed to ALP. What we are
    opposed to is the autocratic attitude of the Southern Ute
    Tribal Council.
        The ALP water project does not meet the legal mandate of
    NEPA or other fiscal and environmental laws and the Bureau of
    Reclamation has ignored the alternative proposed by the
    opponents to the project. The indefinite purposes and needs for
    the project violates NEPA, the Clean Water Act, and is not
    consistent with sound taxpayer public policy.
        The SEIS states that the purpose of and the need for the
    preferred ALP alternative is to implement the Colorado Ute
    Water Rights Settlement Act by providing the Ute Tribes with an
    assured long-term water supply and water acquisition fund in
    order to satisfy the tribes' senior water rights claims as
    quantified in the Settlement Act and to provide for identified
    M&I water needs in the project area.
        What the concerned members of the tribe believe is that the
    proposed project does not implement the Settlement Act.
    Instead, it proposes an entirely different configuration of the
    water development as originally proposed. Settling Indian water
    claims may be a purpose, but implementing the 1988 Settlement
    Agreement clearly is not.
        The Bureau's position is that no uses of the water must be
    identified because it implements an Indian water rights
    settlement. The proposed action does not, however, identify any
    need for non-Indian water in the project. As a matter of fact,
    it does not even justify why non-Indian water is needed, if
    needed at all. There is no valid comparison of the alternatives
    if the purpose of the project is not clearly defined.
        Absent is any specification of how the Ute Tribes will
    actually use their water. According to the SEIS, the ultimate
    use of project water, about three-fourths of the total water
    supply, by the Ute Tribes would be more specifically defined by
    those tribes as future needs develop. The SEIS lists a number
    of non-binding different water uses that the tribes may or may
    not decide to pursue in the future. Noticeably absent is a
    discussion of firm tribal plans to utilize their water. It
    appears that the only presently foreseeable use is tribal water
    marketing.
        The failure to identify actual uses for tribal water is a
    fundamental law that infects the analysis undertaken by the
    Bureau of Reclamation in the SEIS. Without knowing how Ute
    water will be used, it is difficult to rationalize whether or
    not the proposed reservoir is necessary. Other than providing
    water uses proximate to the proposed reservoir or within the
    Animas basin, it is difficult to see what advantages the Ridges
    basin reservoir will achieve that could not be accomplished by
    exchange using the numerous other Federal storage facilities in
    the greater project area. The end uses of the water are
    connected and interdependent actions and NEPA on them must be
    completed before the project can be approved.
        The failure to specify actual water uses is not remedied by
    the speculative non-binding uses offered in the SEIS. While
    several of these may have merit at some point in the future,
    others, notably the single largest water use proposed for a
    project, a coal-fired power plant which the tribal membership
    does not know anything about, are speculative and painfully
    strain even the most optimistic assumptions about future
    development in the Four Corners region. No private sector
    investor, whether for-profit or not-for-profit, would ever
    direct valuable resources into such a pipe dream regardless of
    the beneficiaries.
        The Animas-La Plata project is not needed to facilitate
    tribal water marketing and will impose serious legal and
    economic penalties on the tribal attempts to market water.
    Because the SEIS offers no foreseeable use for the majority of
    tribal water other than marketing, Interior and other Federal
    departments have failed to justify any actual need for the
    Animas-La Plata project.
        The membership of SUGO feels that if the settlement of the
    Indian water rights claim is truly a purpose of the project,
    then the issue of tribal water leasing or sale out of State
    must be considered. Thank you.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Remington follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.030

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.031

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.032

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.033

        Mr. Doolittle. It seems to me over the 10-years I have been
    on this committee, I have heard several hearings on Animas-La
    Plata, so hopefully we will actually make this happen this
    time.
        I would like to include in the record statements from
    Richard K. Griswold, President of the Animas-La Plata Water
    Conservancy District; Thomas C. Turney, State engineer with the
    State of New Mexico; the San Juan Water Commission in New
    Mexico; Fred V. Kroeger, President of the Southwestern Water
    Conservation District; and Michael Black with the Taxpayers for
    the Animas River.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Griswold follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.034

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.035

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.036

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.037

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.038

        [The prepared statement of Mr. Turney follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.039

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.040

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.041

        [The prepared statement of the San Juan Water Commission
    follows:]

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.042

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.043

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.044

    [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.045

        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kroeger follows:]

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.046

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.047

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.048

        [The prepared statement of Mr. Black follows:]
        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.049

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.050

        [GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7697.051

        Mr. Doolittle. Mr. Hayes, it has been implied that this
    legislation impedes the tribe from interstate water marketing
    and I wondered if you agree that the tribe has given up any
    right to market their water or would they be required in any
    case, with or without this bill, to abide by State law in
    marketing their water.
        Mr. Hayes. Mr. Chairman, the marketing constraints have
    been identified in the existing Animas-La Plata legislation and
    the proposed amendments would not affect that in any way. So
    the status quo in terms of authorization would continue in
    place, and there are some restrictions on interstate marketing
    in the current authorization.
        Mr. Doolittle. So we are not making anything worse in that
    regard by the present legislation?
        Mr. Hayes. There is no change.
        Mr. Doolittle. There is language in this bill, I think,
    intended to address the administration's concern about the
    desire to deauthorize the project; it is on page seven at the
    bottom, paragraph three, which says, ``if constructed, the
    facility described in paragraph 1(a) shall not be used in
    conjunction with any other facility authorized as part of the
    Animas-La Plata project without express authorization from
    Congress.'' Does that legislation meet your concern and cause
    you to support the bill, Mr. Hayes?
        Mr. Hayes. On this issue, the language that have set forth
    would address the issue satisfactorily from the
    administration's perspective, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Doolittle. Thank you. This project is much reduced from
    what it was. Personally, I would have preferred the larger
    version, but perhaps some of you would, too. In any event, this
    is where we are. It has been a long, difficult process. I
    appreciate the patience you have had with our committee. It
    really would not have taken very long if we had not been
    delayed by those votes.
        The subcommittee is pretty familiar, I think, with this
    project because of the number of times it has been before us. I
    would hope we could go to markup fairly soon after this hearing
    and go from there and hopefully it can move through the Senate
    side expeditiously.
        I would like to thank all of you for your attendance today.
    We may have further questions and I would ask you to respond
    expeditiously to those that we would tender following the
    hearing. With that, the hearing is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 4:19 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]