Here’s the release from Governor Ritter’s office (Myung Oak Kim/Todd Hartman):

Gov. Bill Ritter today issued a report outlining a series of proposals for resolving disputes between landowners and rafters in Colorado. He also signed an executive order creating the River Access Mediation Commission to provide a way for some of the most contentious conflicts between boaters and property owners to be addressed.

“I’m pleased to announce this report, and the formation of a mediation commission, so we can move forward in resolving these issues fairly and thoughtfully,” Gov. Ritter said. “I believe a mediation commission can work its way through these matters in a civil, reasoned way where all parties’ views are respected and considered in developing a resolution that could alleviate the need for litigation.”

The Governor’s River Access Dispute Resolution Task Force was a 17-member group created in July to help craft ways to sort out conflicts on Colorado rivers on a stretch-by-stretch basis as those disputes arise. Gov. Ritter created the task force through executive order as part of an agreement with stakeholders to set aside numerous conflicting ballot measures on the issue.

The task force report includes eight unanimous recommendations to the Governor on ways to limit disputes between various parties. The recommendations include creation of the River Access Mediation Commission to address the thorniest disagreements. Participation by disputing parties would be voluntary, and the commission would not have the power of arbitration. The report can be accessed on the website of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources at http://dnr.state.co.us/

“I commend the hard work of the task force in developing this report, and extend my thanks for its effort in working through difficult issues that required members to find common ground,” Gov. Ritter said. “The report includes a host of recommendations with great potential to reduce friction between rafters and landowners. I look forward to sharing the recommendations with Governor-Elect John Hickenlooper, and urge him, along with the State Legislature, to thoughtfully review the report.”

More coverage from the Associated Press via The Durango Herald:

The bill was prompted by disputes between landowners who don’t want boaters using waterways flowing through their property and boaters who say the state’s waters belong to the public. The conflict came to a head on western Colorado’s Taylor River last year when a developer told commercial rafters they could no longer float through his property.

“I believe a mediation commission can work its way through these matters in a civil, reasoned way where all the parties’ views are respected and considered in developing a resolution that could alleviate the need for litigation,” Ritter said in a statement.

More whitewater coverage here. More HB 10-1188 coverage here.

From The Mountain Mail (Audrey Gilpin):

Arkansas Headwaters Recreation Area was presented as a “success story,” with park manager Rob White highlighting the citizens task force and river management plan as a way of monitoring river use and mitigating disputes among landowners, non-commercial boaters and private boaters. Comprised of anglers, private and commercial boaters, water users, environmental interests, property owners and local government representatives, White said the Arkansas headwaters task force creates a “communication tool” and management of the Arkansas River that’s “all about compromise,” White said…

The long-standing dispute about whether a “right to float” in Colorado exists or ought to exist, however, is not what the task force was charged to decipher. Mike King, deputy director of the Colorado Department of Natural Resources, said the task force is trying to find adequate processes and tools to mitigate disputes. Arkansas River Canyon landowner Tim Canterbury said he’d “hate” to see any standard go statewide. “We have a unique situation on the Arkansas River. Can you legislate respect?” he said…

Task force members will attempt to find “solutions” in dealing with problems identified during the meeting including criminal trespass, obstructions in the river such as diversions, fences and structures; issues with commercial and non-commercial boaters, volume of boaters and impact to natural resources. The Governor’s group will meet from 1-5 p.m. Oct. 13 in Glenwood Springs followed by a public input meeting from 5-7 p.m. The task force is to submit a final report to the governor no later than Dec. 31, identifying a framework for a “dispute resolution process for conflicts between rafters and landowners.”

More whitewater coverage here.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Tracy Harmon):

“We are going to try to get neighbors to meet with neighbors without having to have legislation,” said Bob Hamel, a member of the task force who also is Colorado River Outfitters Association president and owner of Arkansas River Tours in Cotopaxi. “We (outfitters) are not going to give up floating on any rivers in Colorado and it’s not about signing agreements, because every situation is unique.”[…]

Nathrop rancher Frank McMurry told the task force about his concerns from a private landowner’s perspective. He said he and other landowners feelvulnerable to lawsuits. “I own the last piece of private property before you go into Browns Canyon, and the carrying capacity is 300 rafts. With seven people in a raft, that is 2,100 rafters a day and that is not counting the private boaters,” McMurry said. “My property has become an attractive nuisance and rafters have caused a big part of that,” McMurry said. He described finding private boaters on his property who had set up a volleyball net and were playing volleyball. Another time, a group of private boaters had stopped to chase some of his heifers at a time when two bulls were with the cattle. “What if one of them was hurt by a bull? Who is liable for that? I think the state should afford us liability (insurance) as property owners,” McMurry said.

The public still can weigh in on the issue. Written input or comments may be provided to Governor’s River Access Dispute Resolution Task Force via e-mail at riveraccess@state.co.us, via mail at Colorado Department of Natural Resources, attention Kim Burgess, 1313 Sherman St., Room 718, Denver, CO 80203. For information, log onto the website http://www.dnr.state.co.us.

More whitewater coverage here.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The 17-member Governor’s River Access Dispute Resolution Task Force will meet from 2 to 7 p.m. at the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District officers, 339 E. Rainbow Blvd. (U.S. 50). Public input is set from 5 to 7 p.m. The task force was created to help craft a dispute-resolution process to resolve future conflicts between boaters and private landowners on Colorado waterways. It met earlier this month for the first time, and additional meetings are planned in October and November…

Written input or comments may be provided to the Governor’s River Access Dispute Resolution Task Force. Written comments will be compiled and delivered to Task Force members for their consideration.

By e-mail: riveraccess@state.co.us

By mail: Colorado Department of Natural Resources, 1313 Sherman Street, Room 718, Denver, CO 80203. Attention: Kim Burgess.

More whitewater coverage here.

Here’s the release from Governor Ritter’s office (Theo Stein/Evan Dreyer):

Gov. Bill Ritter today announced he has appointed 17 members to the River Access Dispute Resolution Task Force. The Task Force was created to help craft a dispute-resolution process to resolve future conflicts between river users and private landowners on Colorado waterways.

The Task Force appointments follow heated debate that occurred earlier this year over proposed legislation, a specific dispute along the Taylor River and the introduction of several ballot measures which have since been withdrawn.

The Governor appointed the following 14 members to serve as voting members of the Task Force. The terms expire at the pleasure of the Governor:

– Robert A. Hamel of Howard
– Greg Felt of Salida
– G. David Costlow of Fort Collins
– Thomas J. Klienschnitz of Grand Junction
– Leslie A. Tyson of Denver
– Jay P.K. Kenny of Denver
– Lee L. Spann of Gunnison
– James R. Ford of Pagosa Springs
– John G. Leede of Greenwood Village
– Charles B. White of Denver
– Jay Fetcher of Clark
– Paul C. Crane of Boulder
– Sen. Dan Gibbs of Silverthorne
-Undersheriff Richard D. Besecker of Gunnison

He also appointed three members to serve as non-voting members of the Task Force, also with terms expiring at the please of the Governor:

– Rebecca Swanson of Denver, to serve as a co-chair of the Task Force from the Governor’s Office

– Patrick D. Tooley of Denver, to serve as a non-voting ex-officio member and as a legal advisor to the Task Force

– Carolyn F. Burr of Denver, to serve as a non-voting ex-officio member and as a legal advisor to the Task Force

The executive director of the Department of Natural Resources, or a selected designee, will also serve as a co-chair. The charge of the Task Force is to develop a framework for resolving conflicts among landowners, anglers, commercial rafters, and the boating public on a stretch-by-stretch basis as disputes arise. The group will:

– Hold two public meetings in different parts of the state to gather stakeholder input.

-Hold at least four other open meetings to evaluate the public input and consider options for a dispute-resolution process.

– Prepare a final report with recommendations for the Governor and Legislature by Dec. 31.

More coverage from The Pueblo Chieftain (Patrick Malone). From the article:

The task force was created to help craft a dispute-resolution process to resolve future conflicts between river users and private landowners on Colorado waterways. During this year’s legislative session, a bill seeking to clarify whether rafters are entitled to float through rivers on private land failed to settle the question. The issue sprang from a dispute between a landowner along the Taylor River on the Western Slope and commercial rafters who for years had traversed the stretch through the land that the developer recently had acquired. The developer had threatened to halt passage through his property. A compromise was struck, avoiding about two dozen proposed ballot initiatives on the subject. The task force’s objective is to develop a framework for resolving conflicts between landowners, commercial rafters, anglers and the boating public on a stretch-by-stretch basis as disputes arise.

More whitewater coverage here.



From the Associated Press via the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

Colorado’s governor on Tuesday announced that a group of river rafters and a real estate developer who didn’t want paddlers floating by his property reached a four-year agreement…

The developer’s move [to close a certain reach of the Taylor River] prompted an intense debate over who owns riverways in Colorado, where tourists flock in summers to ride some of the West’s best freshwater rapids. The developer said that rafting trips would disturb a fishing preserve…

A state lawmaker from Gunnison tried and failed to protect rafting rights in a bill considered last session. After the bill failed, both sides vowed to seek ballot initiatives to put the question to voters, and 24 separate questions have been proposed. The four-year agreement announced Tuesday calls for both sides to agree to recall those proposals. Ritter hailed the decision to withdraw the flurry of ballot proposals “courageous.”

However, the “right to float” question isn’t settled. The agreement applies only to the stretch of the Taylor River in dispute, leaving unanswered the question of whether property owners with public rivers on their land can prevent paddlers, even if the rafters don’t stop on privately owned banks. “I do believe it needs to be addressed,” [Matt Brown, an owner of Scenic River Tours] said of permanent floating rights…

Ritter said he’s set up a panel of landowners, commercial and recreational river users and even police to propose a statewide procedure for settling river disputes. The report is due by the end of the year, in time for lawmakers to consider permanent rafting rules next session.

More whitewater coverage here.



From The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Charles Ashby):

“What we tried to do with this bill was relate the statutes with reality,” said Rep. Kathleen Curry, the unaffiliated Gunnison legislator who introduced the bill with Sen. Mary Hodge, D-Brighton. “What unraveled the legislative process was the fear of litigation and how the courts would interpret (it). We had a bill that looked reasonable when you read the bill, but the opposition felt like … the courts would make a broader finding and open up everything.”

When Curry introduced the measure in January, it was designed to allow rafters to float down Colorado rivers through private land, touching the riverbed and banks only in cases of emergencies.

But when it reached the Senate, lawmakers there said the idea constituted a taking of private property. As a result, that chamber turned it into a study, but sent it to a nongovernmental organization made up of landowners and water companies, not recreational river users.

Curry said without the bill, a slew of ballot questions may be placed before voters this fall to decide the matter one way or the other. There are 16 pro-landowner measures pending, and four designed to open private land to all rafting.

Regardless of what gets on the ballot in November, Curry predicted the uneasy peace that has existed between rafting companies and landowners will end, and a heated war will erupt this summer between the two sides. She said she already is hearing reports of rafters cutting down fences that property owners have erected to stop them from traversing rivers that cross their land.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.



From The Denver Post (Jessica Fender):

The six-lawmaker panel deadlocked when members couldn’t settle on rules regarding how, when or whether river enthusiasts should be able to float through private property. The lack of a legislative resolution probably means voters will be asked to settle the fight on the November ballot. Twenty ballot initiatives on the subject are currently waiting in the wings, though that number will certainly be culled before Election Day. Rep. Kathleen Curry, sponsor of House Bill 1188, said none of the initiatives fully address complicated issues such as portage and trespassing that are likely to be glossed over by campaigns on both sides. “We are unable to reach an agreement, but that doesn’t mean the issue goes away,” said Curry, I-Gunnison. “Tensions are up back home, but I couldn’t help them.”[…]

Meanwhile, private mediation on the conflict that brought the bill to the fore continues, according to lobbyist Mike Feeley, who represents land developer Jackson-Shaw. The Texas company purchased both sides of the bank along a 2-mile stretch of the Taylor River and plans an exclusive vacation community. It threatened to bar two Almont rafting outfitters from floating through the property. At Gov. Bill Ritter’s direction, the rafting and land-development companies have started to negotiate a compromise.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.



From Steamboat Today (Michael J. Mitchell):

The sustainability of one of Colorado’s most sensitive natural resources, our waterways, is being pitted against the demand for recreation and commerce. Floating, while it may seem to be non-consumptive, has impacts on the habitats where it occurs. There is bank damage at put in/take outs, toilets next to rivers, bank side parking lots, trails along rivers, overfishing and trash to name just a few. These impacts add up, resulting in real biological consequences. The impact is not limited to fish; fish-eating bald eagles, water dependent river otters, migratory waterfowl and other riparian dependent species will also be affected if constant boat traffic is present.

The unregulated floating of Colorado rivers is proposed for one of the most precious wildlife habitats in our state; the thin vegetated line along waterways known as riparian habitat. Our riparian habitat represents just 3 percent of the land area but it is essential to sustain 75 percent of our wildlife species. If we were to consider such a major change within one of our National Forests or other federal lands we would be required by law to evaluate the environmental consequences through professional assessments and impact statements. Why would we want less for Colorado’s rivers?

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.



From The Pueblo Chieftain (Patrick Malone):

On Friday, the House voted to refer HB1188 as amended in the Senate to a conference committee with representatives from both chambers. The bill as originally passed by the House sought to allow commercial rafters to float through private property. In the Senate, it first was amended to open rivers through private property to anyone who wanted to use them — including anglers and individual, noncommercial rafters — and then amended to become a study by the Colorado Water Congress with no action to be taken this session by the Legislature. The Colorado Water Congress is the pre-eminent lobby in the state on issues pertaining to water use. Those changes on Friday faced a vote of the House, where the bill was referred to a conference committee.

More coverage from The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel (Charles Ashby):

When House Bill 1188 cleared the Colorado House in mid-February, it allowed rafters to cross private property but limited how often people can make contact with land. When the Senate debated the bill in March, however, the measure was reduced to a study, and then by a nongovernmental panel that focuses on water issues rather than recreation or landowner rights. As a result, its chief sponsor, unaffiliated Rep. Kathleen Curry of Gunnison, got the House to vote 41-21 Friday to send it to a conference committee of three representatives and three senators. There she hopes a compromise can be drafted. There are 24 proposed ballot questions addressing the issue, and Gov. Bill Ritter even got involved in trying to negotiate a compromise. At issue is the right to float on publicly owned water versus concerns over private property rights.

More coverage from Joe Hanel writing for The Durango Herald. From the article:

Curry asked Friday that the bill go to a conference committee to continue the discussion. The House granted her request on a 41-21 vote. The Senate had adjourned for the day and must agree before a conference committee could begin.

Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg, R-Sterling, urged the House to follow the Senate’s lead and turn the bill into a study. “They had the sense to say, you know what, this is much bigger than what we can deal with right now,” Sonnenberg said.

Curry introduced the bill because of a dispute between a rafting company and a developer in her district. The two sides are trying to negotiate a settlement. “Even if they reach an agreement, the problem still persists throughout the state, and the ballot initiative process is out of our reach,” Curry said in a letter to her colleagues Tuesday.

More coverage from The Pulse- of Colorado Farm Bureau (Garin Vorthmann):

Representative Kathleen Curry, the House sponsor of the measure, did not support the Senate version of the bill which directed the Colorado Water Congress to facilitate a study regarding the issue of rafting through private property and to report back to the legislature in November. Rep. Curry asked for permission to have a conference committee established, which will be made up of 3 members from the House of Representatives and 3 members from the Senate. The committee will then be charged with trying to draft a compromise between the two versions of the bill.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here. More 2010 Colorado legislation coverage here.

Here’s an opinion piece penned by Charles White running in The Denver Post. Mr. White maintains that the CWC is the right organization to help shepherd the bill. From the article:

The Colorado Senate made the right decision in referring the contentious proposal to establish a “right to float” on the state’s waterways to the Colorado Water Congress. This was not, as suggested by The Post, a “punt” of the issues. Rather, it was a realistic recognition that more work is needed to address the serious flaws in the original bill. Under House Bill 1188…

The Colorado Water Congress is ideally suited to address each of these issues. Since 1957, it has brought divergent interest groups together to study, negotiate, and propose legislation on a wide variety of topics related to Colorado water. The CWC would convene a broadly representative panel to make recommendations for new legislation that could have much broader public support. This common-sense solution to the current impasse deserves The Post’s endorsement.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.

From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):

The head of the [Colorado Water Congress] said this has been a “failure” in water negotiations. While emotions run high over the bill, it is actually an example of how the connections often promoted by the CWC broke down in this case, said Doug Kemper, CWC executive director, at the Arkansas River Basin Water Forum at The Abbey this week. “HB1188 is a failure to use the network,” he said…

The House in February passed a version that gave both commercial rafters the right to float through property around obstacles. The Senate last month passed a different version of the bill, saying current law is unclear and ordering a study of the issue by the Colorado Water Congress to be completed by Oct. 31. The House has yet to reconsider the bill…

The original bill, drafted by Rep. Kathleen Curry, Unaffiliated-Gunnison, had warning flags for the water community, particularly in referring to English common law and the right of navigability, Kemper said. “The CWC came out opposed to the bill,” Kemper said. “Our concern was the word navigable has a meaning at the federal level that starts bringing in federal regulations. “We also wanted to make sure water rights operations were not impacted either with diversion structures or permitting on projects.”

In Colorado, the rafting issue is clouded by a state Supreme Court ruling that said there was no right to float across private property and a subsequent ruling by a state attorney general that said rafters made no criminal trespass if they float through private property, provided they do not touch the banks or bed of the stream…

Kemper said the various ballot titles might boil down to “two or three on each side,” and said regardless of which path the Legislature takes, some are likely to reach the ballot. “It’s coming down to rafters vs. property interests, and if that happens, it’s a failure of the network,” Kemper said. Kemper, who worked for the City of Aurora as it developed water interests in the Arkansas River basin, said the flow agreements and formation of the Arkansas Headwaters Recreation Area show where cooperation can lead. “There has been too much hard work in the Arkansas Valley between rafting interests and the water rights holders for this to become a wedge,” Kemper said.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.

Here’s a long recap of the issues around HB 10-1188, from Forrest Whitman writing for the Weekly Register-Call/ Gilpin County News. Click through and read the whole thing. Here’s an excerpt:

Last summer Greg Felt said he’d rather die than give up his right to float. Felt is one passionate boater! He laments that despite the fact the state licenses river guides and the federal government issues permits on individual rivers, boaters still paddle under the legal cloud of civil trespass. Last summer he asked, “Do boaters have to become lawyers?” Greg tells some hair-raising tales, including being “sighted in” by a rifleman (who didn’t shoot). For now he’s going to keep floating, he says, no matter what. Said he, it’s “float or die”…

Law gets worked out anew in each generation and river law is no exception. The Curry bill now being debated in the CO State Senate is just one more part of that working out. [Colorado’s first Territorial Governor, Willaim Gilpin] had great faith in the wisdom of “the Great Coloradoan people” to figure out these questions. If we ever do guarantee a right to float, old William Gilpin will be smiling down from the golden dome in Denver. He, at least, knew those boaters on Clear Creek have a right to be there.

More coverage from the Aspen Daily News (Curtis Wackerle):

In six years at the state Legislature, Rep. Kathleen Curry said she has never been involved in a more controversial bill than her “right to float” bill, which the state Senate last week punted to a study committee…

The bill [is] back [in] the House now, and Curry must decide what her next step is. She could go to a conference committee and attempt to convince some of her fellow legislators to move away from the study provision. She was not optimistic that she would end up with the support she needs to pass the bill without the study provision, however…

The amendment “turned the bill into a study, which is a waste of time,” Curry said, noting that studies of the issue have occurred before…

Rachel Nance, a legislative coordinator with the Colorado Association of Realtors, said her group was also concerned about infringing on private property rights. They felt that the proposal went too far, and that the status quo, which allows boaters to float down the middle of a river, but requires them to obtain permission to step on the banks on private land, is good enough, she said.

…the issue is not confined to the Taylor River, [Bob Hamel, head of the Colorado River Outfitters Association] said, noting a similar threat going into this summer on the Yampa River made by a landowner to a commercial float fishing company, and a long line of similar incidents for the past 30 years. “The problem is it keeps resurfacing,” Hamel said. Curry agrees. The state’s rafting industry “is wondering who is going to be next,” she said.

With Curry and the rafting industry opposed to the study provision, forces are gathering for a November ballot question on a right to float law. Should that happen, the ballot language would likely be less friendly to landowners than the compromise bill Curry had carried. For example, a ballot question would likely include private boaters, which Curry’s bill excluded, and would likely include the portage provision. The deadline to file language initiating a ballot question is Friday. “If you think it’s big fanfare now … just wait until we go on TV,” Hamel said.

More 2010 Colorado legislation coverage here.

From The Denver Post (Scott Willoughby):

Before a political end-around coordinated by Senate President Brandon Shaffer and others last Friday, HB 1188, the so-called “River Outfitters Navigation Bill,” had the potential to firmly establish the rights of Colorado’s professional and private boaters to continue floating on rivers that pass through both public and private property. The bill passed in the Senate on Monday, but not before it had been gutted by an amendment effectively reducing it to a privately funded six-month study by the Colorado Water Congress — a group that has already gone on record in opposition to the legislation originally drafted by Rep. Kathleen Curry of Gunnison…

According to Curry, boaters can float through private property without criminal trespass charges if they don’t drop anchor or touch the banks. Boaters lack the same protection for civil trespass complaints. And current law provides no guidance on what to do if a river is blocked by an obstacle such as a fallen tree or, as in the case of the Jackson-Shaw property, a poorly designed bridge.

Above it all, however, Shaw is somehow under the impression that he now owns the river that Russell and others have been floating for decades. “It is my firm opinion any individual or group or company rafting through our private property is committing an act similar to someone walking across your front lawn on a short cut to the grocery store. It may be convenient, but it is nonetheless illegal,” states the letter signed by company president Lewis W. Shaw II. “I encourage you to select counsel who can look freshly at the specific circumstance of private property and rafting in Colorado without merely arranging ideas to confirm a previously espoused opinion.”[…]

Given the vast quantity of private property lining the banks of float-friendly rivers throughout Colorado, Schumacher’s concerns are legitimate. At least one small, underfunded rafting company facing civil trespassing suits already has been put out of business by lawyers representing Shaw and other out-of-state landowners in Colorado — the same lawyers currently sitting on the Colorado Water Congress. Bear in mind that episode occurred shortly after a similar “blue ribbon” panel had been appointed to study the same matter for two years a decade ago. Until the state’s muddled right-to-float laws are clarified on both the civil and criminal sides, others realistically face the same fate…

Contributing to the problem is the antiquated bridge on the Shaw property that becomes dangerously low for boats to pass under when the Taylor runs high. In Shaw’s view, the portage necessary to avoid the hazard constitutes a further violation. Just the same, the developer — who has invested a small fortune in other upgrades — has yet to make good on a promise to replace the bridge and bring it up to code. Amendments allowing short portages around hazardous obstacles in the river and expanding HB 1188’s reach to include private boaters had been approved before last Friday’s tactical death sentence. Those amendments helped establish a solid bill that provided firm legal footing for practices that have been established in Colorado for almost half a century, while the Senate’s final version did nothing more than offer weak politicians an escape clause until the next election.

More HB 10-1188 coverage here.