releases: http://tipton.house.gov/press-release/witnesses-agree-tipton-epa-forest-service-regulations-jeopardize-access-water-rights
Data license: MIT · Data source: dwillis/congress-press
This data as json
| url | title | date | year | month | party | chamber | state | member_name | bioguide_id | domain | scraper | source | date_source | text | has_text | collected_at | updated_at |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| http://tipton.house.gov/press-release/witnesses-agree-tipton-epa-forest-service-regulations-jeopardize-access-water-rights | Witnesses Agree with Tipton that EPA, Forest Service Regulations Jeopardize Access to Water Rights | 2014-06-24 | 2014 | 2014-06 | Republican | House | CO | Scott Tipton | T000470 | tipton.house.gov | legacy | WASHINGTON—Today, Congressman Scott Tipton (R-CO) questioned witnesses on the impact that the proposed U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Groundwater Directive and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) waters of the U.S. rule will have on Western water users including farmers and ranchers, ski areas, municipalities and others during a Water and Power Subcommittee hearing titled, "New Federal Schemes to Soak Up Water Authority: Impacts on States, Water Users, Recreation, and Jobs." USFS Chief Tom Tidwell and Bureau of Reclamation Acting Commissioner Lowell Pimley were invited to testify at the hearing but declined to appear to answer questions on the proposed rules. Tipton questioned Lawrence Martin from the National Water Resources Association (NWRA) on the burden the rules would place on agriculture producers and other users as they attempt to utilize their water rights. Martin told Tipton that the rules add a great deal of uncertainty, delays and costs even for the most basic projects. “I think I would probably have to hire a hydrologist or a hydro geologist just to make a determination every time I needed to do a little bit of work on a canal or a ditch to figure out if it was excluded or not excluded,” said Martin. “It’s going to delay very needed and very good projects.” Watch Tipton’s Q&A with the Witnesses HERE. Martin also testified that the Forest Service Directive runs contrary to the long-standing federal policy to defer to states on regulating groundwater, and will impact pending reserved water rights claims in states including Colorado. “This is a disturbing onslaught coming out of this Administration. First we had the Blueways Order, then the conditional use of permit on ski areas. Now we have the regulatory scheme coming out of the EPA, which is essentially the biggest water grab in American history in my estimation, being supplemented by the Forest Service with their groundwater directive,” said Tipton. “This is of deep concern throughout the West where water is a private property right. We have state law and priority-based systems which have worked well to provide clean, affordable water for many uses including drinking, irrigation for farmers and ranchers, clean, renewable hydropower, recreation, and other uses. The rules put forward by the EPA and Forest Service not only undermine state law and priority-based systems, but create severe uncertainty, add costs and delays to critical water projects, and jeopardize the ability of private water rights users to access their rights and maintain their livelihoods.” In testimony submitted to the record, Farm Family Alliance Executive Director Dan Keppen testified on the need for Congressman Tipton’s legislation to help protect private water rights from some of these federal abuses, stating, “Thankfully, with the leadership from your Subcommittee, the House has passed the “Water Rights Protection Act”, which would put a halt to the conditioning of permits and leases on the transfer, relinquishment, or other impairment of any water right to the U.S. by the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture.” Tipton has been at the forefront in Washington in fighting to protect private water rights from federal takings and interference. Tipton’s Water Rights Protection Act (H.R. 3189) passed the House with bipartisan support and is currently awaiting a vote in the Senate. Witness testimony from today’s hearing can be found HERE. Background: This week Tipton raised concerns that the Forest Service Groundwater Management Directive reinforces the current policy under Manual 2441.32 (Possessory Interests), which instructs the agency to continue to claim water rights of permittees, to obtain water rights in the name of the United States, but this time in the context of a massive watershed-wide groundwater policy. The scope of the overall policy combined with the directive to “obtain water rights under applicable state law for groundwater and groundwater dependent surface water needed by the Forest Service” could give regional Forest Service staff the agency approval to go after any water right arising on and off Forest Service lands that they deem necessary to carry out the broad objectives of the manual. Read more HERE. The EPA’s proposed rule drastically expands the agency’s regulatory reach by redefining “waters of the U.S.” under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to include virtually every form of surface water including tributaries and ditches. The Forest Service’s proposed Groundwater Directive, released in May, expands its reach over groundwater, and seeks to establish new bureaucratic hurdles to interfere with private water users’ ability to access their water—including their ability to access water from tributaries or streams that could potentially feed into groundwater. View the full Forest Service Directive HERE. Combined the rules could have a severe impact on water users’ abilities to access their private water rights. Tipton recently questioned U.S. Department of Agriculture Undersecretary Robert Bonnie during a House Agriculture Subcommittee hearing on the impacts of the EPA and Forest Service rules on agriculture producers’ ability to access their water. Read more HERE. The Water Rights Protection Act (H.R. 3189): Prohibits federal land management 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; Prohibits the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture from imposing other conditions that require the transfer of water rights without just compensation; Upholds longstanding federal deference to state water law; and Has no cost to taxpayers. | 1 | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z | 2026-03-30T12:14:52Z |