Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, said he expects his House Bill 1013 to die without a vote in May, when the Legislature adjourns for the year. His bill would have forbid the Forest Service from demanding that ski areas sign over their water rights in return for approval of their permits to operate on federal land.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think it\u2019s important for the state to tell the feds to stay out of our business,\u201d Sonnenberg said.<\/p>\n
Colorado law allows water right holders to sell the right to whomever they choose. But the Forest Service wants to make sure water used for snowmaking doesn\u2019t get sold to condo developers or others who would use it for purposes other than skiing.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe\u2019re committed to the long-term health of recreational opportunities and economic opportunities that the ski resorts provide for Colorado,\u201d said Chris Strebig, spokesman for the Forest Service\u2019s regional office in Golden.<\/p>\n
But Sonnenberg\u2019s bill would have amended Colorado water law to forbid the U.S. government from requiring anyone to surrender their water rights in order to get a land-use permit.<\/p>\n
Legislators got calls urging them to kill the bill from Harris Sherman, who is the undersecretary of agriculture and the federal official who oversees the Forest Service. Many legislators know Sherman personally, because he directed the state Department of Natural Resources before he went to Washington.<\/p>\n
There are two sides to the story.<\/p>\n
Colorado law treats water rights as a property right. People who own the rights can use them or sell them as they please, as long as a water court approves of the use of the water. Sonnenberg says the U.S. government has no business adding extra conditions.<\/p>\n
The Forest Service, on the other hand, says it is merely looking out for Colorado\u2019s winter recreation economy, which depends heavily on water for snowmaking.<\/p>\n
The issue isn\u2019t limited to ski resorts. The Forest Service conditions on water rights can apply to grazing leases to ranchers, as well.<\/p>\n
Rep. Claire Levy, D-Boulder, opposes Sonnenberg\u2019s bill, which she thinks oversteps the state\u2019s authority.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s a state law on what the federal government can do on a special use permit or lease on federal land. I don\u2019t think Colorado has the power to pass a law to that effect,\u201d Levy said.<\/p>\n
Legislators worked out a deal, which both Levy and Sonnenberg confirmed: The House will vote on a symbolic resolution that disapproves of the Forest Service\u2019s practice on water rights, but Sonnenberg\u2019s bill will \u201cdie on the calendar\u201d \u2013 legislative slang for being killed without a vote on the last day of the year.<\/p>\n
\u201cOne is better than nothing,\u201d Sonnenberg said. \u201cIf we get the resolution, we can at least send a message, and I\u2019m OK with that. I would rather have sent two messages.\u201d<\/p>\n
Ski resorts sued the Forest Service over its policy and won last December when a Denver judge overturned the Forest Service\u2019s decision, citing \u201csevere\u201d problems in adopting the rule without public notice.<\/p>\n
So the Forest Service is trying again to adopt a rule to tie water rights to the land. Next week, it is sponsoring a series of public meetings in Lakewood, Salt Lake City and Lake Tahoe, Calif., to solicit public input on the policy.<\/p>\n
Sherman announced earlier this week that he would step down from his U.S. Department of Agriculture post in early May.<\/p>\n