My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP05306
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
5001-6000
>
WSP05306
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 2:17:46 PM
Creation date
10/12/2006 12:57:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.700
Description
Colorado River
Basin
Colorado Mainstem
Date
1/1/3000
Author
Getches and Meyers
Title
The River of Controversy - Persistent Issues
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.
/
52
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 />~ <br /> <br />promised a number of jobs for Navajos and increased revenues ior che tribe.59 <br /> <br />By another agreement made in 1~S7 the Navajos waived their early priority date <br /> <br />on the San Juan River, the price of congressional approval of the Navajo <br />60 <br />Indian Irrigation Project. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />Tribal agreements to forego use of water rights have been surrounded by <br /> <br />political <br /> <br />and legal problems. <br />61 <br />considerable doubt <br /> <br />The wisdom of both Navajo agreements has been <br /> <br />cast into <br /> <br />and the Ute deferral agreement has been chal- <br /> <br />lenged as unlawful. Interests in Indian real property cannot lawfully be <br />62 <br />transferred without congressional consent. A contract to defer use of water <br /> <br />rights while not strictly a "transfer" effectively leases rights to others and <br /> <br />probably comes within the prohibition.63 Because no statute authorizes <br /> <br />federal officials to approve a lease or other transfer of Indian water rights, <br /> <br />a particular agreement may be subject to challenge by the Indian parties. <br /> <br />Challenges should be expected where the benefits of deferral are questionable <br /> <br />or nonexistent. Thus, reliance cannot be placed on negotiated agreements <br /> <br />unless Congress consents to them, but when the interests of all concerned are <br /> <br />served and a fair agreement is negotiated, congressional assent is likely. If <br /> <br />water is more valuable to non-Indians such agreements are possible. <br />Cicdrl--s.w--'O <br />One way of ~IVtng Southern California's expected shortfall in available <br /> <br />water supplies would be for Metropolitan Water District or other interests to <br /> <br />contract with some of the tribes. They could be assured of a reliable supply, <br />64 <br />free of the spectre of being displaced by an initiation of Indian uses. <br /> <br />Leases and other transfers of Indian water rights could be made for an appro- <br /> <br />priate sum or for other consideration (such as a trade for irrigable land <br /> <br />elsewhere, construction of irrigation facilities to serve part of the reser- <br /> <br />vatlon, a share of electric power produced, or an interest 1n a business). <br /> <br />A basic question to be considered in connection with contracts regarding <br /> <br />- III - <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.