| OCR Text |
Show CHAPTER VIII 137 land, nor to the acreage being irrigated when the Reservation was created, but that enough water was reserved to satisfy the future expanding agricultural and related water needs of each Indian Reservation (Special Master's Report, page 260). The Special Master was more specific as to the question of the quantity of water so reserved. He rejected an open end decree (Special Master's Report, pages 263 and 264) and concluded that the United States effectuated the intention to provide for the future needs of the Indians by reserving sufficient water to irrigate all of the "practicably" irrigable lands in a Reservation and to supply related stock and domestic uses. The magnitude of the water rights created by the United States is measured by the amount of irrigable land set aside within a Reservation and not by the number of Indians inhabiting it. The amount of water reserved for the five mainstream Reservations and the water rights created thereby, are measured by the water needed for agricultural, stock and related domestic purposes. The reservations of water were made for the purpose of enabling the Indians to develop a viable agricultural economy; other uses, such as those for industry, which might consume substantially more water than agricultural uses, were not contemplated at the time the Reservations were created. Indeed, the United States asked only for enough water to satisfy future agricultural and related uses. This does not necessarily mean, however, that water reserved for Indian Reservations may not be used for purposes other than agricultural and related uses (Special Master's Report, pages 254 through 266). The Special Master noted further: "The water rights established for the benefit of the five Indian Reservations and enforced in the recommended decree are similar in many respects to the ordinary water right recognized under the law of many western states. They are of fixed magnitude and priority and are appurtenant to defined lands. They may be utilized regardless of the character of the particular user. Thus Congress has provided for the leasing of certain Reservation lands to non-Indians, and these lessees may exercise the water rights appurtenant to the leased lands. Skeem v. United States, 273 Fed. 93, 96 (9th Cir. 1921). The measurement used in defining the magnitude of the water rights is the amount of water necessary for agricultural and related purposes because this was the initial purpose of the reservations, but the decree establishes a property right which the United States may utilize or dispose of for the benefit of the Indians as the relevant law may allow. See United States v. Powers, 305 U.S. 527 (1939)." (Special Master's Report, page 266.) C.15.2 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law The Special Master made findings of fact and conclusions of law for the five Indian Reservations along the Colorado River: Chemehuevi, Cocopah, Yuma, Colorado River, and Fort Mohave. These findings and conclusions were carried forward and are enumerated in the decree recommended by the Special Master and adopted with certain exceptions by the Supreme Court. These findings of fact established the date when each Reservation was established, the number of acres of irrigable land, and the maximum annual diversion requirement in numbers of acre-feet of water. The Special Master resolved a dispute concerning the boundaries of the Colorado River Indian Reservation and made a similar determination with regard to a boundary dispute on the Fort Mohave Indian Reservation. His reason for so doing was that a determination of the amount of irrigable acreage within the Reservations and the consequent award of a quantity of water based on this determination required adjudication of the boundaries. (But see Supreme Court Opinion which disagreed with the Special Master as to the need to determine these boundaries.) C.15.3 National Forests, Recreation Areas, Parks, Memorials, Monuments and Lands Administered by the Bureau of Land Management The Special Master found it necessary to treat only the Lake Mead National Recreation Area as the single recreational area which at that time diverted less than 300 acre-feet of water from the Colorado River, and concluded it was inappropriate to predict which other national forests, parks, monuments, memorials or lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management might attempt to utilize water from the mainstream in the future. He concluded that the United States had the power to reserve water in the |
