WSPC05416

• File Number: 8064
• Description: Indian Water Rights
• State: CO
• Date: 5/1/1984
• Author: Western Governors As
• Title: Indian Water Rights in the West
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

-15-

2393
Two very recent cases shed light on the open-endedness
of Winters rights. In Nevada v. United States 20/ the Supreme
Court held that a decree which resulted from a general ad-
judication could not be re-opened to enlarge Indian water
rights for fishery purposes when the Indian rights were

originally quantified for irrigation uses. In
A . C l' f . d .. 21/ h S
r~zona v. a ~ orn~a ec~s~on - t e upreme

the most recent

Court held that

while language in the Supreme Court decree which mandated con-

tinuing jurisdiction over the case allowed for changes in
quantified rights because of changes in reservation size (i.e.,

for boundary changes), the language did not allow establishment
of expanded water rights for lands within reservation bounda-

ries which were omitted from consideration in the earlier

determination of rights. Perhaps these decisions signify a

flat rejection of the theory that Indian water rights were

open-ended and susceptible to expansion at any time. A

narrower interpretation, however, is that they were evidence

of the Court's respect for earlier court decrees establishing

water rights and its reluctance to upset them under most

circumstances.

Three other recent cases dealing with quantification should
also be mentioned. In Colville Confederated Tribes v. Walton ~/

the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recognized the existence

of an Indian water right to support a fishery and to maintain