[Congressional Record Volume 160, Number 45 (Friday, March 21, 2014)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E405-E407]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 3189

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. SCOTT R. TIPTON

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, March 21, 2014

  Mr. TIPTON. Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit the following:

                                               Grand Junction Area


                                          Chamber of Commerce,

                            Grand Junction, CO, November 22, 2013.
     Hon. Scott Tipton,
     Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Jared Polis,
     Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Honorable Representatives Tipton and Polis: As the 
     voice of business on Colorado's western slope, representing 
     over 900 businesses, we want to thank you for introducing 
     H.R. 3189 as a way to ensure that water rights are 
     continually protected in Colorado. It is absurd that the 
     federal government requires ski resorts to relinquish their 
     rights as a condition of granting permits, and this practice 
     must be stopped.
       The Grand Junction Chamber of Commerce offers legislative 
     guidelines on water that include the following points: Water 
     rights in Colorado and the West have been considered a vital 
     asset and personal property for many years. Water is an 
     essential component of the economic, social and environmental 
     quality of life that we enjoy. The preservation and 
     protection of private ownership and the right to use water, 
     its conservation, and its wise use are necessary to preserve 
     the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of 
     western Colorado and the entire state. Furthermore, 
     industries in Colorado such as agriculture, small businesses, 
     tourism, and natural resource development require steady 
     reliable and high quality water supplies.
       The passage of H.R. 3189 would ensure that tourism 
     operations as well as other businesses' private property 
     rights are protected when it comes to water. It will also 
     help the regulatory uncertainty and remove the concern that 
     if a ski area wants to grow or expand it will not lose its 
     property. This helps create a sure business climate in 
     Colorado. Thank you for sponsoring this bill. We urge the 
     passage of H.R. 3189.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Michael Burke,
     Chairman of the Board.
                                  ____

                             Garfield County, CO January 13, 2014.
     Re Garfield County Board of County Commissioners' Letter of 
         support for pending legislation H.R. 3189: Water Rights 
         Protection Act

     Hon. Scott Tipton,
     Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Representative Tipton: The purpose of this letter is 
     to provide you with unanimous support from Garfield County 
     Board of County Commissioners (the Board) for H.R. 3189, 
     ``The Water Rights Protection Act.'' Many of the Counties in 
     Colorado are largely comprised of federal lands. For example, 
     2/3rd of Garfield County (or approximately 2,000 sq. miles) 
     is held and managed by either the Bureau of Land Management 
     (BLM) or the U.S. Forest Service (USFS). Many private 
     businesses and industries in Garfield County including but 
     not limited to ranching, agriculture, guiding and outfitting, 
     and the ski industry (Ski Sunlight) to name a few, rely on 
     the use of these federal lands to operate and thrive. Land 
     management decisions made on these lands can have a 
     significant socioeconomic impact on the County and, more 
     importantly, to the private businesses and activities that 
     have operated here even prior to statehood.
       It is these businesses that make up key portions of the 
     fabric of our local communities and are important 
     contributors to our local economies. Moreover, they have 
     lawfully obtained and privately paid for water rights 
     necessary to the success of their operations. However, 
     because of their use of federal lands for their operations, 
     they also are also dependent on permit approvals from federal 
     agencies to continue operate in Garfield County. Specific to 
     pending H.R. 3189, the Board supports this legislation as it 
     protects existing water rights obtained and held by these 
     private businesses from an arbitrary and uncompensated taking 
     by the federal government through the use of conditions on 
     permits or any other regulatory mechanism. Moreover, it is 
     unconscionable that the federal government shall attempt to 
     hold these businesses hostage in order to `take' their water 
     rights without legal authority. To do so shall, no doubt, 
     render private businesses as victims and casualties of 
     government overreach and possible failure in the ability to 
     control their future.
       We are encouraged to see such wide bi-partisan support for 
     this legislation which clearly underscores its value and 
     hopeful passage into law. It is rather unfortunate that its 
     takes legislation such as this to reaffirm what are long 
     standing existing rights, but the Board is pleased to see 
     your efforts be put to such a good cause on behalf of 
     citizens and businesses in Garfield County.
       Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any 
     questions about the position of the Board outlined above.
           Very truly yours,
     John Martin,
       Chairman, Garfield County Board of County Commissioners.
     Mike Samson,
       Commissioner, Garfield County Board of County 
     Commissioners.
     Tom Jankovsky,
       Garfield County Board of County Commissioners.
                                  ____



                              American Farm Bureau Federation,

                                  Washington, DC, October 4, 2013.
     Hon. Scott Tipton,
     Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Jared Polis,
     Longworth House Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Reps. Tipton and Polis: On behalf of more than 6 
     million Farm Bureau member families across the United States, 
     I commend you for your introduction of H.R. 3189, the Water 
     Rights Protection Act. The American Farm Bureau Federation 
     endorses the Tipton-Polis bill, and will work closely with 
     you to broaden bipartisan support for this measure and to 
     gain its swift consideration and approval by the House of 
     Representatives.
       H.R. 3189 grants no new rights to any party, nor does it in 
     any way infringe on existing rights of individuals, states or 
     the federal government. This legislation simply reaffirms 
     what has been existing law for generations and which is 
     expressed in numerous places in federal law, including the 
     Mining Act of 1866; the 1897 Organic Act establishing the 
     U.S. Forest Service; the Taylor Grazing Act; and the Federal 
     Land Policy and Management Act of 1976.
       There is no provision in federal law authorizing or 
     permitting the Forest Service or the Bureau of Land 
     Management to compel owners of lawfully acquired water rights 
     to surrender those rights or to acquire them in the name of 
     the United States. Thus, H.R. 3189 does nothing more than 
     assure holders of BLM or Forest Service permits that their 
     lawfully acquired rights will not be abridged and that 
     federal agencies may not unlawfully use the permit process to 
     acquire rights they do not currently possess.
       We look forward to working with you on this important 
     legislation and again commend you for your leadership in this 
     important area.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Bob Stallman,
     President.
                                  ____



                                         Family Farm Alliance,

                           Klamath Falls, Oregon, October 8, 2013.
     Re Support for ``Water Rights Protection Act'' (H.R. 3189)

     Hon. Scott Tipton,
     House of Representatives, Cannon House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Tipton: On behalf of the Family Farm 
     Alliance, this letter expresses our formal support for your 
     ``Water Rights Protection Act'' (H.R. 3189). This important 
     legislation would prohibit the conditioning of any federal 
     permit, lease, or other use agreement on the transfer, 
     relinquishment, or other impairment of any water right to the 
     United States by the Secretaries of the Interior and 
     Agriculture.
       The Alliance is a grassroots organization of family 
     farmers, ranchers, irrigation districts and allied industries 
     in 16 Western states. The Alliance is focused on one mission: 
     To ensure the availability of reliable, affordable irrigation 
     water supplies to Western farmers and ranchers. The Alliance 
     has long advocated that solutions to conflicts over the 
     allocation and use of water resources must begin with 
     recognition of the traditional deference to state water 
     allocation systems. Federal agencies must recognize and 
     respect state-based water rights and develop their management 
     decisions according to state law and abide by state decrees 
     defining both federal and non-federal rights. Federal 
     agencies need to work within the framework of existing prior 
     appropriation systems instead of attempting to fashion 
     solutions which circumvent current water rights allocation 
     and administration schemes.
       Unfortunately, in recent years, some agencies within the 
     federal government have repeatedly demonstrated they will not 
     abide by this philosophy. These efforts constitute

[[Page E406]]

     a federal overreach and a violation of private property 
     rights.
       For example, the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) has attempted 
     to implement a permit condition that requires the transfer of 
     privately held water rights to the federal government as a 
     permit condition on National Forest System lands. There is no 
     compensation for the transfer of these privately held rights 
     despite the fact that many stakeholders have invested their 
     own capital in developing the rights. Additionally, federal 
     land management agencies are leveraging Western water users 
     in an effort to acquire additional water supplies for the 
     federal government by requiring water users to apply for 
     their rights under state law in the name of the United States 
     rather than for themselves. USFS continues to take private 
     water rights hostage through their permit conditions, despite 
     objections from elected officials, business owners, private 
     property advocates and a U.S. District Court ruling.
       Our farmers and ranchers rely on their vested water rights 
     to secure operating loans, as well as irrigate crops and 
     water livestock. Federal agencies should not be able to 
     leverage those water rights against farming and ranching 
     families who have long depended upon federal permits and 
     leases to support actions like grazing.
       The Water Rights Protection Act would protect communities, 
     businesses, recreation opportunities, farmers and ranchers as 
     well as other individuals that rely on privately held water 
     rights for their livelihood from federal takings. It would do 
     so by prohibiting federal agencies from extorting water 
     rights through the use of permits, leases, and other land 
     management arrangements, for which it would otherwise have to 
     pay just compensation under the 5th Amendment of the 
     Constitution. The Water Rights Protection Act protects 
     privately held water rights, prohibits federal takings, and 
     upholds state water law by:
       Prohibiting agencies from implementing a permit condition 
     that requires the transfer of privately held water rights to 
     the federal government in order to receive or renew a permit 
     for the use of land;
       Prohibiting the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 
     of Agriculture from requiring water users to acquire rights 
     for the United States rather than for the water user 
     themselves;
       Upholds longstanding federal deference to state water law;
       Has no cost to the American taxpayer.
       Some Family Farm Alliance members in Arizona and Colorado 
     have expressed some concerns with language contained in the 
     original bill. We understand that they are working with you 
     and Rep. Gosar to modify the language so that changes can be 
     easily made by the Water and Power Subcommittee. We support 
     H.R. 3189 with those changes.
       Thank you for this opportunity to provide support for your 
     bill, which is very important to the family farmers and 
     ranchers of our membership. If you have any questions about 
     this letter, I encourage you or your staff to contact me at 
     (541)-892-6244.
           Sincerely,
                                                       Dan Keppen,
     Executive Director.
                                  ____



                                      Durango Mountain Resort,

                                    Durango, CO, October 15, 2013.
     Re Letter of Support for Water Rights Protection Act (H.R. 
         3189)

     Congressman Scott Tipton,
     House of Representatives,
     Durango, CO.
     Congressman Jared Polis,
     House of Representatives, Longworth House Office Building, 
         Washington, DC.
       Dear Congressman Tipton and Congressman Polis: Please 
     consider this letter as Durango Mountain Resort's formal 
     expression of support for the Water Rights Protection Act 
     (H.R. 3189). We applaud you for sponsoring this legislation 
     to prohibit the conditioning of any permit, lease, or other 
     use agreement on the transfer, relinquishment, or other 
     impairment of any water right to the United States by the 
     Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture. We also hope you 
     will consider our suggested amendment language to prohibit 
     the Secretaries from denying access to or us of a water 
     right.
       Durango Mountain Resort (DMR) provides its local community 
     with significant jobs and recreational opportunities that 
     support the economy of Southwestern Colorado. And DMR has 
     consistently shown excellent stewardship of the environment, 
     taking careful measures to eliminate negative impact on its 
     land and resources. In fact, the resort received an ``A'' 
     grade on its SACC Environmental Report Card this year. The 
     resort is proud of its grading and continuously strives to 
     exceed environmental standards.
       Durango Mountain Resort, like many resorts in the southwest 
     region, relies heavily on access to its water supplies for 
     healthy operation of the resort. This is especially true 
     during periods of drought which have plagued southwestern 
     Colorado for several years now. DMR has proven resourceful in 
     its ability to come up with alternative methodologies to 
     produce snow during these dry winter years. Unfortunately, 
     due to recent restrictions imposed by the U.S. Forest Service 
     (USFS), the resort is no longer able to count on water from 
     the Cascade Aqueduct for its snowmaking water. The USFS 
     essentially shut down one of DMR's major water sources by 
     imposing an in-stream flow requirement that reduced DMR's 
     water supply by 95% of its historical amount. When DMR then 
     submitted an application to access and develop its prior 
     water rights in Hermosa Park, the USFS refused to process 
     DMR's application, denying DMR's rights that were reserved 
     through a prior USFS land exchange agreement with the USFS. 
     DMR believes these actions by the USFS are a blatant attempt 
     by the federal government to extort water rights through the 
     violation of existing water appropriation agreements and 
     systems.
       DMR has offered countless remedies to the USFS to 
     circumvent the dire consequences these restrictions have 
     imposed. Each time the USFS has shown it is not willing to 
     consider alternative solutions even though it was made clear 
     that their actions could easily put the resort out of 
     business and unilaterally eliminate the jobs and recreational 
     offerings it provides to the community.
       The Water Rights Protection Act would protect communities, 
     businesses, recreational attractions, farmers and ranchers, 
     as well as other individuals that rely on privately held 
     water rights for their livelihood, from federal takings. It 
     would do so by prohibiting federal agencies from extorting 
     water rights through the use of permits, leases, and other 
     land management arrangements, for which it would otherwise 
     have to pay just compensation under the 5th Amendment of the 
     Constitution. The Water Rights Protection Act protects 
     privately held water rights, prohibits federal takings, and 
     upholds state water law by:
       Prohibiting agencies from implementing a permit condition 
     that requires the transfer of privately held water rights to 
     the federal government in order to receive or renew a permit 
     for the use of land;
       Prohibiting the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary 
     of Agriculture from requiring water users to acquire rights 
     for the United States rather than for the water user 
     themselves;
       Prohibiting the Secretaries from denying access to or use 
     of a water right;
       Upholding longstanding federal deference to state water 
     law, and it has no cost to the American taxpayer.
       Thank you for the opportunity to provide support for the 
     Water Rights Protection Act (H.R. 3189). This legislation is 
     very important to Durango Mountain Resort, its employees, 
     business partners, guests, and surrounding communities. If 
     you have any questions about this letter, please contact me 
     at 970-426-7242.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Gary S. Derck,
     President and CEO.
                                  ____



                                     Colorado Ski Country USA,

                                                  October 4, 2013.
     Hon. Doc Hastings,
     Chairman, House Natural Resources Committee, Longworth House 
         Office Building Washington, DC.
       Dear Chairman: I am writing on behalf of Colorado Ski 
     Country USA (CSCUSA), the industry association and global 
     voice of skiing and snowboarding in Colorado, in support of 
     H.R. 3189, the Water Rights Protection Act. CSCUSA represents 
     twenty ski areas in Colorado that operate on National Forest 
     System lands under a special use permit from the U.S. Forest 
     Service. These public land resorts hosted over 6.3 million 
     skier visits in Colorado in the 2012/13 ski season alone, and 
     skiing and snowboarding constitute a $3.0 billion annual 
     economic impact to our state.
       CSCUSA supports H.R. 3189 because it would prohibit the 
     U.S. Forest Service from requiring our resorts to transfer 
     valuable water rights to the Forest Service as a condition of 
     receiving a permit, or to apply for water rights in the name 
     of the United States, without compensation.
       While the Forest Service insists that such actions would be 
     intended only to maintain the long-run viability of the 
     resorts as ski and snowboard areas, requiring resorts to 
     transfer the water rights they need to operate so as to 
     prevent their sale to a third party is a solution in search 
     of a problem. Moreover, required transfers of water rights 
     that are critical to ski area operations would politicize 
     their use, with each change in administration changing 
     priorities for water use.
       Furthermore, requiring transfer of valuable water rights to 
     the NFS as a condition of receiving a permit raises serious 
     Fifth Amendment concerns. Our member resorts' water rights 
     were acquired and developed at great expense pursuant to 
     Colorado law, and in some cases predate the Forest Service 
     itself. If the NFS wants to secure its own water rights, it 
     should buy them on Colorado's well-regulated water market 
     like everyone else.
       Thank you for scheduling a hearing on H.R. 3189 and for 
     your leadership on this issue. It means a great deal to 
     CSCUSA and our member ski resorts operating across Colorado 
     on NFS lands.
           Best Regards,
                                                    Melanie Mills,
                                                President and CEO.

[[Page E407]]



                          ____________________