My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01303
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01303
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:00:08 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:53:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/14/1960
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
103
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />1780 <br /> <br />get tired of hearing me talk about these <br />Indians - maybe you already have - but that <br />language which is found in that paragraph is <br />excellent so far as it goes. However, I am <br />fearful that it doesn't go far enough and I <br />am arso questioning whether my suggestion can <br />be carried out. <br /> <br />, I want to talk about something other than <br />the Indian lands involved in the Navajo Proj- <br />ect or in the State of New Mexico. I am assum- <br />ing that the United States Supreme Court will <br />go along with the Department of Justice - and <br />that may be an erroneous assumption but I think <br />we have to assume it for safety's sake - that <br />the rights of water for the irrigation of In- <br />dian reservation lands are rights which came <br />into existence coincidentally with the creation <br />of the reservation. Now if that proposition is <br />written into law by the United States~Supreme <br />Court, then when applied to the San Juan it will <br />mean this: that not only in connection with <br />Navajo lands in New Mexico but all other Indian <br />reservation lands, physically susceptible of <br />irrigation by Colorado River water, not .San Juan <br />water alone, but Colorado River water, have a <br />preference, or we would say if we were talking <br />about rights in Colorado, it is senior to any <br />other right on the river which has come into <br />existence or vested subsequently to the date <br />of the creation of that Indian reservation. <br /> <br />To pinpoint a little bit more what I am <br />thinking about, down below the Davis Dam on the <br />lower river, there is the Colorado Indian Reser- <br />vation where they are presently operating diver- <br />sion from the Colorado River by means of the <br />Headgate Walk Dam - I believe that is the name <br />of it. That Indian reservation is a large one. <br />There is a lot of land, as I understand it and <br />that would have to be verified, not now being <br />irrigated but can be irrigated by means of an <br />enlargement of that diversion. Now if the <br />Supreme Court adopts that proposition I spoke <br />of a moment ago, it would mean that water for <br />the irrigation of those Indian lands in the <br />Colorado Indian Reservation, clear down in <br />Arizona and below Lee Ferry, would have a right <br />senior to even the vested rights on the San <br />Juan River above the Navajo Dam in Colorado and <br />New Mexico. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.