Laserfiche WebLink
<br />reasoned that the federal government ~uld not reserve lands for specific <br /> <br />uses unless it also intended to reserve unappropriated water necessaty <br /> <br />to fulfill the objectives of tile reservation.91 'Itle Court has also recently <br /> <br />ct>served in dictum, however, that n [w)here water is only valuable for a <br /> <br />secorxiary use of the reservation . . . there arises tile contrary inference <br /> <br />that Congress interx:led . . . that tile United States ~uld acquire water <br /> <br />in tile sane (,laIU1er as any otiler ~lic or private appropriator.":!Q/ 'Itlus, <br /> <br />an irotx>rtant distinction is drawn between (a) carrying out the purposes of <br /> <br />a reservation of federal land, and (b) managing unreserved federal lands <br /> <br />or reserved federal lands for congressionally-authorized management obJec- <br /> <br />tives apart fran the reservation purpose(s); i.e., only the fOniEr carty <br />witil tilan reserved water rights. <br /> <br />'!he lIEasure of tile federal reserved water right is that quantity of <br /> <br />water needed to a=r.lplish tile purposes of the reservation arxl no Ilvre.IlI <br />'!he priority date of the federal reserved water right for purposes of determin- <br /> <br />ing seniority 0:1: water rights relative to those obtained under state law <br /> <br />is tile date action is initiated to create (or chan:Je the purposes of) a <br /> <br />federal reservation. <br /> <br />21 Cappaert v. United States, 426 U.S. at 139; see Uni~ States v. New Mexico, <br />438 U.S. 696, 698-700 (1978). <br /> <br />101 Uni~ States v. New Mexico, 438 U.S. at 702; but ~ Cappaert v. United <br />States, 426 U.S. 128, 143. <br /> <br />11/ Cappaert v. United States, 426 U.S. at 139 and 141. <br /> <br />-16- <br />