WSP05306 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Indian reserved W<lter rights is whether those rights should ,be alIenable at all. An outright transfer of a reserved right such as a sale or long-term lease is diffic~lt to justify. The right is an asset that exists only to the extent necessary to fulfill the purpose or the reservation. On the other hand, a temporary arrangement may help to preserve the asset for future Indian use at the expiration of the agree~ent by having the principal competitors for its use acknowledge that it exists. Indeed, the essential purpose of Indian reservations-"civilizing" the Indians and making the Indians self-suffi- cient--may best be fulfilled by letting them market their water resources. Tribes may be better off for the present receiving payments instead of water and others may be quite willing to pay for the assurance of a supply not subject to interruption by future exercise of reserved rights. But many believe that Indian rights to water are strictly tied to use on the reserva- tions, throwing the idea of conveyances into serious question. Even if other users of the river formally acknowledge Inidan rights, and the Indians have only deferred their claims, would the water ever be available to the tribes for reservation uses should they need it rhere? And what are the tradeoffs in terms of coherent social structure and community life? A community could be built on a developed agricultural use of water but probably could not be founded on a common interest in collection and distribution of periodic pay- ments made by others for the tribe to forego such uses. As in other Indian policy debates, the ultimate question is to what extent should Indians be assimilated into the larger society? (0;' 1) FEDERAL-STATE RELATIONS ~ill Federal Pollution Laws Affect The Quantity Of Water Available To Colorado River Users? (5;:2) Growing assertions of national control over water quality under a ple- - 19 -