Western States Water Council 2005 Report

Home Browse Search

Mike Jackson, mentioning the great concern for a reliable source of funding, and given that this could be provided by the Domenici bill, asked if the DOI was proceeding under the existing budget caps. Myers affirmed that as of yet, they are operating under the existing budget. Tracy Labin asked if Solicitor Myers could foresee a federal mechanism for establishing water rights without the necessity of having a currently existing dispute. Myers said that he understood the frustration that the Tule River tribe felt, since the tribe wants to protect its rights through quantification before litigation arises. He responded that quantification is a matter of resources, and that there is no easy answer. This was followed by a tribal member's comment that the U.S., under the trust relationship between the federal government and Native Americans, had an affirmative duty to quantify the tribe's water rights. Myers promised that he would talk with Secretary Norton in this regard. Mike Brophy, responded positively to the changes that have been implemented, and that are in the works with the new Administration. He said that the criteria and procedures for dealing with Indian water rights settlements need to be flexible in order to be successful. Brophy asked that the Administration be forthright with the hard questions, and to say "no" up -front, if there is not enough money to fund the settlement. He also said that the Domenici amendment is a plausible solution to the settlement conundrum. Jim Morsette, Counsel for the Chippewa Cree Tribe expressed the need for togetherness during this time of war. He used his family members, who are in the military, as an example of the patriotism that Native Americans feel for this country. Morsette said that the lives lost in the Twin Towers tragedies are sacred, just as are the waters upon which Native Americans rely. He expressed the desire to set up a dialog with Secretary Norton to discuss: (1) funding Indian water rights settlements; (2) the Funding Task Force; and (3) regional consultations. Representing the Western Governors' Association (WGA), Shaun McGrath gave a brief background and overview of the purposes of the organization. The WGA has a standing policy supporting negotiation rather than litigation. The WGA also holds the position that the federal government has the responsibility to participate on behalf of tribes, and to fund their share of water right settlement costs. McGrath reemphasized that it is absolutely a federal obligation, just as the U.S. has obligations to pay judgments. This duty cannot be dismissed or forgotten. In addition to stressing the importance of the Domenici bill, he mentioned that soon a bill would be introduced to create a National Drought Council and a National Drought Fund, which could assist in proper water resources planning. McGrath concluded by saying that we are in a new era, and that we have to get to the point where settlements are accepted as the way to do business. Overview of the Shivwits Band of Paiute Settlement An overview of an August 2000 settlement with the Shivwits Band of Paiutes was presented by Eve Woods, the Band's attorney, along with an historical background. Ron Thompson, Manager of the Washington County Water Conservancy District, described the Santa Clara River system and explained legal intricacies that involved both the local and state governments over the three year negotiation process. Cathy Wilson of the BIA concurred that the negotiations went very fast since 30