WSP08807 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

4 A tribe may have potential, inchoate claims to enormous amounts of water, but actually use not a single drop. To get "wet" water in the American West usually requires dams, to capture variable runoff, and ditches and canals to transport the stored water when and where needed. These kinds of engineering works usually require capital investment that tribes do not have. Thus the ingredients for a political compromise are present: Indians, politically weak, with a large potential claim and L.~ ~ without money for water works and other needed economic development; non-Indians, ,:.. ,', politically powerful, using or interested in using the water potentially claimed by the Indians; and Congress, politically beholden to non-Indians and capable of appropriating money for water projects. .1 .~. It is in this context that "quantification" of Indian Winters claims arises. Quantification is the official naming of an amount of water that, out of a tribe's total potential Winters claim, will constitute the tribe's enforceable water right. Quantification conventionally occurs in the course of a negotiated settlement (which must be embodied in federal legislation) or litigation. 10 The settlement of Winters claims. :d, ~,- ~f~, '.-'\ b;;' "'-:, year, out of a total river flow of 1.2-1.5 million acre-feet. See. e.g., Collins, "Tribes Act Court to Order Regulation," Casper Star-Tribune. July 31, 1990, at A1, col. 5. It has been estimated that unadjudicated claims by Indians could exceed by many times the average annual flows of several of the West's major rivers, including the Klamath, Colorado, Flathead, Salmon, San Juan, and Yuba Rivers. ~ Thorsen, "Negotiated Settlements," ~ note 3 at 27-28. lOSee. e.g., American Indian Lawyer Training Program, Inc., American Indian Resources Institute, Tribal Water Manavement Handbook 17 (1987) and F. Cohen,.SllIlli! note 4 at 599.