9.4 Contemporary Challenges in Indian Water Law

Indian water law faces ongoing challenges as tribes navigate complex legal and environmental issues. Climate change, groundwater rights, and off-reservation use complicate the application of the Winters Doctrine in modern contexts.

Balancing tribal water rights with other interests, like endangered species protection and non-Indian community needs, requires innovative approaches. Collaborative watershed management and negotiated settlements offer potential solutions to these contemporary water conflicts.

Water Rights Doctrines

Foundational Principles of Indian Water Rights

Top images from around the web for Foundational Principles of Indian Water Rights

• 

  Dip pen used to sign a major appropriation | Used in 1911, t… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Non-Timber Forest Products Riparian Buffer | Although ripari… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  2.9 Corridor width | Wide corridors, both upland and riparia… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Dip pen used to sign a major appropriation | Used in 1911, t… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Non-Timber Forest Products Riparian Buffer | Although ripari… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Foundational Principles of Indian Water Rights

• 

  Dip pen used to sign a major appropriation | Used in 1911, t… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Non-Timber Forest Products Riparian Buffer | Although ripari… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  2.9 Corridor width | Wide corridors, both upland and riparia… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Dip pen used to sign a major appropriation | Used in 1911, t… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Non-Timber Forest Products Riparian Buffer | Although ripari… | Flickr View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Winters Doctrine established that when the federal government created Indian reservations, it implicitly reserved water rights necessary to fulfill the purpose of the reservation
• Reserved water rights are based on the idea that tribes have inherent rights to water that existed prior to the creation of their reservations and are not subject to state law
• Prior appropriation is a system of water allocation used in many western states (Colorado) that grants rights to the first person to divert water from a source and put it to beneficial use
• Riparian rights grant landowners the right to use water that flows through or adjacent to their property, historically more common in eastern states (Virginia)
• Federal reserved rights extend beyond Indian reservations to other federal lands (national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges) and preempt state water rights

Scope and Priority of Indian Water Rights

• Winters rights are not lost through non-use, unlike rights under the prior appropriation system which can be forfeited if not used regularly
• Priority dates for Indian water rights are typically based on the date the reservation was established, giving them seniority over most other water users in a basin
• Reserved rights encompass water necessary to fulfill both present and future needs of the reservation, including water for agricultural, domestic, and industrial purposes
• The amount of water reserved for a tribe is not limited by the tribe's current water use or needs, but can expand over time as the tribe's needs grow
• In some cases (Arizona v. California), the Supreme Court has quantified Indian water rights using the practicably irrigable acreage (PIA) standard, which reserves enough water to irrigate all arable land on the reservation

Quantification and Settlements

Determining the Amount of Water Reserved

• Quantification is the process of determining the precise amount of water reserved for a tribe under the Winters Doctrine
• Quantification can occur through litigation in state or federal court, or through negotiated settlements between tribes, states, and the federal government
• Adjudication is a legal process for determining the extent and priority of water rights in a particular river basin or watershed, and can include quantification of Indian water rights
• In many cases, tribes have pursued negotiated settlements as an alternative to costly and time-consuming litigation to quantify their water rights

Negotiated Water Settlements

• Water settlements are agreements between tribes, states, and the federal government that quantify tribal water rights and provide funding for water infrastructure development
• Settlements often include provisions for water marketing, which allows tribes to lease a portion of their water rights to other users (cities, industries) in exchange for revenue
• Settlements can provide certainty for all water users in a basin by clearly defining the amount and priority of tribal water rights
• Congress must approve each water settlement, and has enacted over 30 Indian water rights settlements since 1978
• Examples of major water settlements include the Gila River Indian Community Water Settlement (Arizona) and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes Water Compact (Montana)

Contemporary Issues

Emerging Challenges for Indian Water Rights

• Climate change impacts, including drought, reduced snowpack, and shifts in the timing of runoff, pose significant challenges for tribes in managing their water resources
• Groundwater rights for tribes are less well-defined than surface water rights, and the Winters Doctrine has not been consistently applied to groundwater (Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians v. Coachella Valley Water District)
• Off-reservation water use by tribes, such as for economic development projects or water leasing, can be controversial and may face legal challenges from states or other water users
• Tribal water quality standards, which tribes can set under the Clean Water Act, can be more stringent than state standards and have led to conflicts over the regulation of upstream pollution sources (City of Albuquerque v. Browner)

Balancing Tribal Rights and Other Interests

• The Endangered Species Act can limit tribal water use and development if it jeopardizes the survival of listed species (Rio Grande Silvery Minnow v. Bureau of Reclamation)
• Conflicts can arise between tribal water rights and the water needs of neighboring non-Indian communities, particularly in water-scarce regions (Wind River Reservation)
• Tribes have increasingly sought to use their water rights to restore and protect culturally significant water bodies and species (Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe)
• Collaborative watershed management approaches, which involve tribes, states, and other stakeholders in joint planning and decision-making, can help balance competing interests and promote sustainable water use (Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement)
• The federal government has a trust responsibility to protect tribal water rights and resources, but must also consider other federal interests and obligations in water management and allocation