Laserfiche WebLink
<br />i <br /> <br />8 <br /> <br />06(..7 <br /> <br />A. QUANTITY AND BASIC USES OF THE <br />TRIBAL WATER RIGHT <br /> <br />(Article III, Sections A,B,C,D, H and I) <br /> <br />(1) <br /> <br />Summary of Compact Provisions <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The Tribes' reserved water rights are determined <br />finally and forever by this Compact. They are ref~rred to <br />throughout the Compact as "the Tribal Water Right." <br /> <br />-; <br /> <br />The annual quantity of this Tribal Water Right "is <br />the lesser of (i) 1,050,472 acre-feet of diversions or (ii) the <br />quantity nesessary to supply a consumptive use of 525,236 <br />acre-feet." 6 The priority date of the Tribal Water Right is <br />May 1, 1888, the date that the Fort Peck Reservation was <br />established by statute. This priority date attaches to all <br />exercises of the Tribal Water Right. Section A provides that <br />this riqht is held in trust by the United States for the <br />benefit cf the Tribes. <br /> <br />Section A of Article III contains one limit on the <br />quantity of the Tribes' water right. Total diversions from <br />surface water are limited to 950,000 acre-feet, and consumptive <br />uses to 475,000 acre-feet, per year. Whenever annual surface <br />water diversions reach 950,000 acre-feet, the balance of the <br />Tribes' right, or 100,472 acre-feet per year, must be. diverted <br />from ground water. The Tribes have the right to divert ground <br />water as well as surface water under the Compact; we discuss <br />use of ground water separately below, see pp. 44-47. <br /> <br />Article III B, which establishes who may use the <br />Tribal Water Right, is discussed at pp. 10-11, infra. <br /> <br />4 h. <br />T 1S <br />divert and <br /> <br />term is defined in Article TI(25) as the right to <br />use water as confirmed by Article III. <br /> <br />5Article III A. <br /> <br />j <br /> <br />6This priority date was discussed and tentatively agreed <br />upon as early as December 1980. (Tr. December 12, 1980, p. <br />661. See also Tr. September 24, 1981, pp. 26, 28.) Since it <br />is earlier than any state law priority date in the area, the <br />tribal negotiating team did not insist on an earlier 1873 <br />executive order or aboriginal date. There would be no <br />practical difference between these and an 1888 date. <br /> <br />I <br />.",.J <br /> <br />l <br />._1 <br />