Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />the owner of the water right. <br /> <br />3/ The United States District Court for the District of Colo- <br />rado agreed with the state. The United States Court of Appeals, <br />Tenth Circuit, reversed the lower district court finding that the <br />national and sovereign character of the reserved water right <br />claim strongly mitigated against the application of the absten- <br />tion doctrine. United States v. Akin, 504 F.2d 115 (1974). <br /> <br />4/ Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United <br />States, (a/k/a Akin v. United States), 424 U.S. 800 (1976). <br /> <br />5/ These claims were originally all filed as one pleading in <br />the Colorado District Court for Water Division No. 7 as Case No. <br />W-1603-76 and sought confirmation of the reserved rights held by <br />the United States in trust for the Ute Mountain Ute Indian Tribe, <br />the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, individual Indians owning trust <br />allotments on the Southern Ute Indian Reservation and the Bureau <br />of Indian Affairs. Subsequently the application was amended and <br />eleven separate applications were filed, each amended application <br />covering water rights associated with a specific river identified <br />in the amended application. These cases are known as W-1603-76 <br />(Navajo River); W-1603-76A (Blanco River); W-1603-76B (San Juan <br />River); W-1603-76C (Piedra River); W-1603-76D (Pine River); W- <br />l603-76E (Florida River); W-1603-76F (Animas River); W-1603-76G <br />(Mancos River); W-1603-76H (Dolores River); W-1603-76I (McElmo <br />Creek); and W-1603-76J (La Plata River). <br /> <br />if 70 Stat. 105; 43 U.S.C. S 620. <br />II 82 Stat. 885, 43 U.S.C. S 1505. <br />Y 92 Stat. 409. <br />2.1 96 Stat. 1261. <br /> <br />10/ 25 U.S.C. S 177. The Non-Intercourse Act requires that <br />congress approve the transfer of Indian trust property. <br /> <br />11/ The Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1985, Chapter IV of <br />Public Law 99-88, 99 Stat. 293. <br /> <br />12/ "Agreement in Principle Concerning the Colorado Ute Indian <br />Water Rights Settlement and Binding Agreement for Animas-La Plata <br />Project Cost Sharing." <br /> <br />13/ The "law of the river II was not defined in the Final Settle- <br />ment Agreement other than as those state and federal laws, regu- <br /> <br />-12- <br />