water rights – Page 3

Swinomish Prevails in Washington COA Challenge to State Dept. of Ecology in Matter Affecting Treaty Rights

October 3, 2013October 3, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Swinomish Indian Tribal Community v. Washington Dept. of Ecology (PDF).

An excerpt:

This case involves the validity of an amended rule from the Department of Ecology (Ecology) that reserves water from the Skagit River system for future year-round out-of-stream uses, despite the fact that in times of low stream flows these uses will impair established minimum instream flows necessary for fish, wildlife, recreation, navigation, scenic and aesthetic values. Ecology relies on RCW 90.54.020(3)(a) for authority to make the reservations of water despite the existing minimum flows. This statutory provision allows impairment of stream base flows when overriding considerations of public interest are served. The Swinomish Indian Tribal Community (Tribe) petitioned for review in superior court, challenging the validity of Ecology’s amended rule reserving the water.

Available briefs here:

A Historic Assertion of Water Rights by the Klamath Tribes

June 11, 2013June 11, 2013Adrea Korthase

An excerpt from the Oregonian

In March, after 38 years of work, the state found that the tribes’ water rights dated to “time immemorial,” making them by far the most senior. That means the tribes will get water to protect fish in traditional fishing grounds, including two species of suckers on the endangered species list.

Farmers irrigating through the federal government’s 1905 Klamath Reclamation Project, covering roughly 200,000 acres that draw from the lake, will also get water, though they’ll face restrictions, too.

But “off-project” irrigators on about 150,000 acres above the lake generally have junior water rights to reclamation-project irrigators. They’ll have to tap wells if they can or see their water supplies reduced or shut off.

The AP story is here.

The administrative law decision and other materials can be found here.

New Scholarship on Arizona v. California (1963)

May 8, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Lawrence J. MacDonnell published Arizona v. California Revisited in the Natural Resources Journal last fall. Here is the abstract:

The U.S. Supreme Court’s 1963 decision in Arizona v. California profoundly influenced uses of Colorado River basin water in those two states and throughout the basin. This article takes an in-depth look at this litigation, the decision, and its consequences. It argues the decision should be limited to the issues directly decided as the basin states and Mexico now consider ways to deal with a diminished water supply.

Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations SCT Amicus Brief in Tarrant Regional Water District v. Hermann

April 9, 2013Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

Chickasaw and Choctaw Amicus in 11-889

The SCOTUSblog page on this case is here.

Kalispel Tribe Signs Agreement with Federal Agencies On Water and Environmental Management Issues

July 18, 2012July 18, 2012Kate Fort

Here.

The Kalispel Tribe of Indians has signed a 10-year, $39.5 million agreement with federal agencies that focuses on actions to address impacts of Albeni Falls Dam on fish and wildlife in the area of Lake Pend Oreille and the tribe’s reservation along the Pend Oreille River about 55 miles north of Spokane.

The agreement recognizes the tribe’s resource management expertise and its interest in operations at Albeni Falls Dam and includes specific provisions for the tribe to participate in decisions that affect fish, wildlife and water quality.

“The Kalispel Tribe is excited to see this agreement come to fruition as a result of nearly two decades of positive working relationships and on-the-ground successes. We believe this is just the beginning of a strong partnership with the federal agencies and we are hopeful for the future of our important and treasured resources,” said Kalispel Tribal Chairman Glen Nenema.

The agreement makes available approximately $39.5 million over 10 years, including $2.5 million for land acquisitions for wildlife habitat.

The tribe has identified habitat projects to benefit Endangered Species Act listed bull trout as well as west slope cutthroat trout and mountain whitefish.

In addition, the new agreement provides for the tribe, Army Corps of Engineers and Bonneville Power Administration to work together on improving water management actions in late summer and early fall to improve downstream water temperature for bull trout and other aquatic species.

Long Read on Goshute Water Issues

May 17, 2012May 17, 2012Kate Fort

Here. From the Salt Lake City Weekly.

H/T @pechohawk

Release: Important Victory in the Klamath Tribes Water Rights Adjudication

December 4, 2011December 4, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Important Victory in the Klamath Tribes Water Rights Adjudication

Chiloquin, OR- Today was a milestone in the lengthy Klamath Basin Water Rights Adjudication. The judge hearing the part of the Adjudication that deals with the claims of the Klamath Tribes issues six Proposed Orders quantifying the Tribes’ water rights. In each case he ruled largely in favor of the Tribes’ claims.

“The Proposed Orders give everyone in the Basin plenty to think about,” said Jeff Mitchell who leads the Klamath Tribes’ Negotiating Team. “These rulings highlight the role that the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement can play in resolving Basin water issues. The Tribes will be evaluating the rulings and discussing them with others in the Basin to determine the best path from here on.”

Some interests in the Basin advised people that the Tribes’ water rights are minimal, but those interests have been proven wrong. People who followed that advice have obviously been misled in a situation where they are risking a lot.

The rulings encompass the Williamson, Sycan, Sprague, and Wood Rivers along with many of their tributaries, as well as the Klamath Marsh and springs scattered throughout the former Klamath Reservation. Cases involving Upper Klamath Lake and the Klamath River are expected to have decisions handed down in April.

“These rulings emphasize the need for Basin water interests to work together to find ways to share the water, share the pain of drought, and share the bounty of our waterways,” said Tribal Vice-Chairman Don Gentry. “The Tribes are committed to restoring fisheries and water bodies in the Basin, and we believe that agricultural and other water dependent communities can be restored at the same time. That is what the KBRA can do,” he said.

The ruling is welcomed by the Tribes who have fought for their treaty rights for many decades, and are prepared to fight many more. The Tribes’ commitment to the Adjudication reflects their commitment to restoring the health of Basin fisheries and water bodies. “Our commitment to these bounties provided by the Creator will never end,” said Mitchell.