Laserfiche WebLink
<br />5 <br /> <br />whether through negotiation or litigation, is a double-edged sword: Indians doing it <br /> <br /> <br />make specific the water rights to which they previously had only inchoate claims, but <br /> <br /> <br />they also limit the size of their claims to the specified amount.11 Thus they lose or <br /> <br />''waive'' for all time any further Winters claims, if the quantification is legally binding. <br /> <br /> <br />This feature of quantification-the simultaneous taking and relinquishing of water <br /> <br /> <br />rights-suggests that it involves the "compromise" of Winters claims, and analysts <br /> <br /> <br />frequently use the term to describe Indian water settlements. <br /> <br />The simultaneous loss and gain involved in settling Winters claims for all time is <br /> <br />illustrated by the quantities of water that appeared to be at stake when NIIP was <br />under discussion.12 The Navajo Reservation touches the San Juan River from just <br /> <br />downstream of Farmington, New Mexico, to the river's confluence with the mainstem <br /> <br />of the Colorado River, now Lake Powell. At the time that NIIP was under serious <br /> <br />discusion, in the fifties and early sixties, 45 years of annual flow records on the San <br /> <br /> <br />Juan existed for two locations. At the site of Navajo Dam, 13 the average annual flow <br /> <br />11In this sense, quantification of Winters rights is very much like Indian agreement <br />to relinquish rights to all the land and resources that they once used and to live on a <br />small portion of that former claim, a reservation. For this reason, quantification of <br />Winters claims is parallel to treaties creating reservations. Both involve important Indian <br />rights (without water, grants of land in the arid West are meaningless), a part of which <br />Indians relinquish and a part of which they keep. <br /> <br />'art is said that the quantities of water "appeared" to be at stake because flow <br />estimates of the time are now known to be high. ~ text accompanying notes 62 and <br />63,.in!Ia. Also, the precise basis of Navajo claims was not fully known prior to the 1963 <br />decision in Arizona v. California. Thus the figures are offered in this paragraph for <br />illustrative purposes only. <br /> <br />13Navajo Dam, authorized by the Colorado River Storage Project Act, 43 U.S.C., <br />620 et seq. (1956), stores water in Navajo Reservoir, some of which is diverted for use <br />on the Navajo Irrigation Project. It was built between 1958 and 1962. Bureau of <br />