My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP03024
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
3001-4000
>
WSP03024
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:48:15 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:29:58 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8230.100.10
Description
Colorado River Basin Colorado River Litigation - Interstate Litigation - Arizona Vs California
State
AZ
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
2/22/1982
Author
Elbert P Tuttle
Title
In the Supreme Court of the US - October Term 1981 - Report - Special Master Elbert P Tuttle
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
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 />003310 <br /> <br />The Hay and Wood Reserve - once attached to <br />the Camp Mojave Military Reservation for supplies of <br />hay and wood and transferred by Executive Order <br />with the camp in 1890 to the Department of the Inte- <br />rior for the benefit of the Tribe - constitutes approxi- <br />mately 9114.8l acres of a central portion of the Fort <br />Mojave Indian Reservation. The Executive Order de- <br />scribed by courses and distances such an area that <br />straddled the Colorado River. Contrary to the descrip- <br />tion by courses and distances, a surveyor, Sidney <br />Blout, determined under the direction of the General <br />Land Office that the western boundary of this parcel <br />lay further to the east than the description would al- <br />low. The correctness of that survey which eliminated <br />several thous-and acres from the Reservation was long <br />disputed within the Interior Department. The United <br />States in the original proceedings in this case claimed <br />that the description by courses and distances in the <br />Executive Order determined the Reservation bound- <br />ary. The Master made findings and conclusions of law <br />accepting the Blout survey as determinative but the <br />Court disapproved the Master's effort to determine <br />disputed Reservation boundaries, 373 U.S. at 601, and <br />the question remained open. As a result the Court de- <br />creed water rights only for the portion of this parcel <br />that was undisputedly within the Reservation as sur- <br />veyed by Blout. On June 3, 1974, the Secretary of the <br />Interior, acting on the advice of the Solicitor of Inte- <br />rior, resolved the internal dispute within the Interior <br />Department by declaring null and void the 1928 Gen- <br /> <br />58 <br /> <br />I <br />, <br />I <br />j <br />I <br />I <br />j <br />i <br />i <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />eral Land Office survey by Blout and restoring the for- <br />mer boundary for the Hay and Wood Reserve a little <br />more than a mile westward. A new plat was prepared <br />reflecting the order; it was protested by alleged paten- <br />tees of land in the disputed area; these objections were <br />overruled and the final plat was approved and filed on <br />November 6, 1978. This plat added to the Reservation <br />some 3,500 acres not treated as part of the Fort <br />Mojave Reservation when the water allocations were <br />decreed in 1964. The United States alleges that this <br />tract contains approximately 2,000 practicably irriga- <br />ble acres.78 <br /> <br />by the LaFollettes, as properly part of the <br />Reservation. <br /> <br />(a) The Hay and Wood Reserve <br /> <br />(b) The LaFollette Tract <br /> <br />This tract is on the west side of the Fort Mojave <br />Reservation, south of the Hay and Wood Reserve and <br />east of the River. Here the Tribe obtained a stipulated <br />judgment in is favor against the assignees of a railroad <br />patent grant, which had the effect of adding most of a <br />section to the Reservation.77 The United States alleges <br />that this judgment placed approximately 500 addi- <br />tional irrigable acres within the adjusted Reservation <br />boundary.78 The Fort Mojave Tribe also claims water <br />rights for some additional boundary lands in this <br />area.71 <br /> <br />76. u.s. IWl. 42, Table 7. <br /> <br />77. Fort Mojave Tribe v. LaFonette, Civ. No. 69.324MR (D. Ariz. <br />Fob. 7, 1977). <br /> <br />78. U.S. IWl. 42, Table 7. <br /> <br />79. F.M. IWl. 2, plete no. 1; F.M. Supp. IWl. (SepL 1981), record <br />item no. 192; Letter from Thomae W. Fredericka (Nov. 10, 1981), record <br />item no. 202. <br /> <br />59 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.