WSP06879 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

, I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 000629 limiting this rule to State-authorized entities, the states will have little incentive to support tribal-authorized entities. Comment NO.7. We agree with the Fort Mohave Indian Tribe that tribal reserved rights may be transferred off-reservation, provided the transfer causes no injury to other users and there is no federal barrier to such a transfer. We contend that Sporhase v. Nebraska, 458 U.S. 941 (1982) supports the proposition that tribal water may be marketed without regard to state and reservation boundaries. Comment Nt;>. 8. The rules are premised, in part, on the assumption that "[a]ll mainstream Colorado River waters apportioned to the Lower Basin, except for a few thousand acre-feet apportioned to the State of Arizona, have been allocated to specific entities." 62 F.R. at 68493. The three mainstem tribes above Hoover Dam: Hualapai, Havasupai, and Navajo all possess perfected but unadjudicated rights. The rules do not describe how the Department intends to quantifY these rights or how those rights will be impacted by the proposed rulemaking. Specific Comments Again we concur with the comments submitted on behalf of the Fort Mohave Indian Tribe. Those comments should be considered incorporated as modified herein. 9414.1 Purpose, We agree with the Fort Mohave Indian Tribe that the rule should be revised "to address and implement a 'procedural framework' that allows tribes the opportunity to participate and benefit from offstream storage and interstate transfer of Colorado River water." The Department's encouragement to the states to work with the tribes does not fulfill the trust responsibility to tribes. We agree that the proposed rule should not be finalized until a satisfactory framework has been developed. 9414.2 Definitions. Authorized entity: We agree with the Fort Mohave Indian Tribe that the definition should be expanded to include entities authorized by the federal goverrunent pursuant to the framework described above_ Entitlement: The definition does not in,clude the vested water rights of the three mainstem tribes above Hoover Dam. The rule should clarifY how these rights will be addressed. Intentionally created unused apportiorunent: The Navajo Nation has previously asserted its belief that all "[u]nused or undeveloped tribal water should be considered 'intentionally created unused apportiorunent.''' See Stanley M. Pollack, Colorado River Case Study - Perspective of the Tribes, at 3, 16th Annual Water Law Conference, ABA Section of Natural Resources, Energy, and Envirorunental Law (1998)_ Tribal water has been unused as a result of the federal goverrunent's failure to provide tribes with the necessary financial, technical, and political