OCR Text |
Show 276 It is equally clear that the boundary established along the west bank changes as the course of the River changes, except in cases of avulsion. In Oklahoma v. Texas, supra, the Court defined the south bank of the South Fork of the Red River, which was the boundary between Oklahoma and Texas. After setting forth its definition of the south bank the Court said: "The boundary as it was in 1821, when the treaty became effective, is the boundary of today, subject to the right application of the doctrine of erosion and accretion and of avulsion to any intervening changes."38 There is substantial evidence that the Executive Order of 1876 did not intend to establish a fixed boundary and, certainly, a flexible boundary is not inconsistent with the purpose of the Order, which was to prevent the acquisition by non-Indians of land proximate to Indian land on the east side of the River.39 The evidence establishes that various officers and departments of the United States have considered the Colorado River itself and not the 1876 meander line to be the western boundary of the Reservation.40 38260 U. S., at 636. Cf. Railroad Co. v. Schurmeir, 74 U. S. (7 Wall.) 272 (1868); United States v. Boynton, 53 F.2d 297 (9th Cir. 1931); United States v. 11,993.32 Acres of Land More or Less, 116 F. Supp. 671 (D. N. D. 1953). 39See U. S. Exs. 505A, 5O5B, 505C. "Various maps prepared by agencies of the United States (General Land Office; Office of Indian Affairs; Indian Irrigation Service) show no Indian land west of the River in the disputed area. Calif. Exs. 3532-3534. In acquiring land for the construction of Palo Verde Dam, the Palo Verde Irrigation District was required by Congress to furnish easements over land other than that owned by the United States or within the Reservation. The United States was required to pay for Indian land conveyed by the Secretary of the Interior. 68 Stat. 1045 (1954). A portion of the land over which an easement was granted by Palo Verde lay east of the 1876 meander line and west of the course of the River. A portion of the land paid for by the United |
Source |
Original Report: State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California |