9.1 The Winters Doctrine and Reserved Water Rights

The Winters Doctrine, established in 1908, is a game-changer for Native American water rights. It says when the government creates a reservation, it also reserves enough water to make that land livable and useful. This applies to both surface and groundwater.

This doctrine is a big deal because it gives tribes a legal edge in water disputes. It's based on when the reservation was created, not when water was first used. Plus, these rights don't disappear if they're not used, unlike other water rights.

Winters Doctrine and Reserved Water Rights

Origins and Implications of the Winters Doctrine

Top images from around the web for Origins and Implications of the Winters Doctrine

• 

  Fort Meade (South Dakota) – Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Supreme Court – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  File:US Supreme Court.JPG - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Fort Meade (South Dakota) – Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Supreme Court – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

Top images from around the web for Origins and Implications of the Winters Doctrine

• 

  Fort Meade (South Dakota) – Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Supreme Court – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  File:US Supreme Court.JPG - Wikimedia Commons View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  Fort Meade (South Dakota) – Wikipedia View original

  Is this image relevant?

• 

  The Supreme Court – American Government (2e) View original

  Is this image relevant?

1 of 3

• Winters Doctrine established in Winters v. United States (1908) Supreme Court case
• Holds that when federal government creates an Indian reservation, it implicitly reserves sufficient water rights to fulfill the purpose of the reservation
• Reservation of water rights is based on the date the reservation was created, not when water is actually put to use
• Winters rights are not lost through non-use, unlike state water rights under prior appropriation

Scope and Types of Reserved Water Rights

• Reserved water rights extend to water sources within, bordering, and adjacent to reservations (surface and groundwater)
• Federally reserved water rights apply to non-Indian federal lands like national parks, forests, and wildlife refuges based on the purpose of the federal reservation
• Aboriginal water rights stem from tribes' original use and occupancy of ancestral lands and waterways prior to European settlement
  • Not dependent on federal reservation status
  • Based on traditional practices like fishing, hunting, and gathering

Tribal Sovereignty and Control Over Water Resources

• Tribal sovereignty recognized tribes' inherent authority to govern their lands, resources, and members
• Winters Doctrine affirms tribal water rights as a key component of sovereignty
• Tribes can establish water codes, manage water resources, and enter into agreements with other entities to protect and utilize their reserved rights
• Tribal water rights generally supersede state-issued water rights and are not subject to state regulation

Quantification and Allocation

Methods for Quantifying Tribal Water Rights

• Quantification involves determining the volume and scope of a tribe's reserved water rights
• Practicably irrigable acreage (PIA) standard commonly used to measure water rights based on the amount needed to irrigate all practicably irrigable acreage on a reservation
  • Accounts for present and future agricultural water needs
• Other quantification methods consider domestic, commercial, municipal, and industrial uses, as well as water for fish and wildlife habitats

Interaction with State Water Law Systems

• Prior appropriation doctrine used in many western states grants water rights to the first person to divert water and put it to beneficial use
  • "First in time, first in right" principle
• Riparian rights doctrine used in eastern states grants water rights to landowners adjacent to water sources for reasonable use
• Winters rights often come into conflict with state-issued water rights, as they have priority dates based on reservation establishment, not actual water use

Balancing Competing Interests and Beneficial Use

• Beneficial use is a key concept in western water law, requiring water to be put to a useful purpose (irrigation, domestic use, hydropower) and not wasted
• Tribes must demonstrate that their water allocation will be used beneficially, which can include traditional practices and cultural uses
• Negotiated settlements and cooperative agreements can help balance tribal water rights with competing interests of states, local governments, and private water users

Adjudication and Settlements

Water Rights Adjudication Process

• Water adjudication is a legal process to determine and quantify water rights within a specific river basin or watershed
• Adjudications can be initiated by states, tribes, or the federal government to comprehensively resolve water rights claims
• McCarran Amendment (1952) waived U.S. sovereign immunity, allowing state courts to join federal government in water rights adjudications
  • Gave states a venue to quantify and integrate federally reserved water rights with state-issued rights

Negotiated Settlements and Water Compacts

• Negotiated settlements have become a preferred alternative to costly and lengthy litigation in resolving tribal water rights claims
• Settlements allow parties to craft mutually beneficial solutions, often including funding for water infrastructure, conservation measures, and economic development
• Water compacts are agreements between tribes, states, and the federal government that quantify and define the terms of tribal water rights
  • Compacts require approval by Congress, state legislatures, and tribal governments
• Examples of successful settlements include the Colorado Ute Water Rights Settlement (1988) and the Arizona Water Settlements Act (2004)