| OCR Text |
Show XI-16 UPDATING THE HOOVER DAM DOCUMENTS 373 U.S. 546, 601 (1963). The effect of the Supreme Court's decision was to leave the boundary question open for future determination. Location of the Boundary Between Riverside Mountain and the West Bank of the Colorado River The proper position of the first segment of the boundary from the top of Riverside Mountain to the west bank of the river presents little difficulty. The first question that arises is which of two peaks on Riverside Mountain is the top. Absent specific definition in the Executive Orders of November 16, 1874, and May 15, 1876, it is believed that the term "top of Riverside Mountain" should be given its commonly accepted meaning and, therefore, means the highest point of that mountain. The "top of Riverside Mountain" was supposedly monumented during a survey in 1912 by R. A. Farmer; however, there is evidence that this corner was not placed on the highest point of the mountain and, therefore, does not represent the true corner of the reservation boundary. In these circumstances, the language of the Executive Orders of November 16, 1874, and May 15, 1876, must control and the erroneous Farmer survey should be suspended in the reach from Riverside Mountain to the Colorado River for reasons hereinafter stated. It is concluded that the reservation boundary in this reach should follow a line from the highest point on Riverside Mountain on a direct bearing toward the place of beginning as described in the Executive Order of May 15, 1876, until it strikes the proper location of the west bank of the river as it existed in 1876. This line should terminate at the point it intersects the west bank. The Executive Order clearly stated the line should go to the west bank, not half-way down the bank, to the water's edge, or any other place. The bank of a river is the water-washed and relatively permanent elevation or acclivity at the outer line of the riverbed which separates the bed from the adjacent upland, whether hill or valley, and serves to confine the waters when they reach and wash the bank without overflowing it. Oklahoma v. Texas, 260 U.S. 606 (1923). It is, therefore, concluded that the call to the west bank must be taken to mean the line of ordinary high water as it existed in 1876. In determining the location of a boundary, when the United States has not conveyed its title to the abutting lands, it may survey and resurvey what it owns and establish and reestablish boundaries. United States v. State Investment Co., 264 U.S. 206 (1924). The record discloses that all the lands outside the reservation boundary in this reach are owned by the United States and are under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Interior. The lands inside the boundary are owned by the United States in trust for the Colorado River Indian Tribes. No private ownerships are involved. In 1879, W. F. Benson established a meander corner common to sections 25 and 36, T. 2 S., R. 23 E., S.B.M., at a point on the west bank of the Colorado River which also fell on the line between the highest point on Riverside Mountain and the place of beginning. In these circumstances, as a matter of administrative convenience, it may be determined that the reservation boundary can and should be reestablished as a line between the highest point of Riverside Mountain and the meander corner common to the aforesaid sections 25 and 36. This line is sustained by adequate evidence of the proper location of the boundary as described in the Executive Order of May 15, 1876. Location of the Boundary from Section 25, T.2S., R. 23 £., through Section 12,T.5S., R. 23 E., S.B.M. From the point where the line from Riverside Mountain intersects the bank of the river, as described above, the second segment of the boundary should follow downstream along the bank of the river at the line of ordinary high water as it existed at the time of the issuance of the Executive Order of May 15, 1876, to the south boundary of section 12, T. 5 S., R. 23 E., S.B.M., subject to the application of the doctrine of erosion and accretion and avulsion to any intervening changes. Oklahoma v. Texas, supra. |
