Opinion ID: 1118319
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 15

Heading: What Should Be Administered

Text: 1. Entire reservation by state engineerJustices Macy and Brown 2. Distinguishes between ceded and diminished portions of reservation; state engineer must regulate on ceded portion as it was disestablished as reservation; pragmatic to have state engineer regulate on diminished portion as well, though he recognizes Tribal sovereignty on diminished portionJustice Thomas 3. Entire reservation through joint administrationJustice Cardine 4. Distinguishes between Indian and non-Indian water rights on the reservation but concludes that monitoring is a lesser infringement than administration and should be conducted by the Tribes on the entire reservationJustice Golden
Justice MacyDiscusses the opinion in terms of administration but concludes that present opinion is consistent with Big Horn I; discusses instream flow in terms of state law application but concludes that current decision on administration is consistent with the duties and limitations imposed by Big Horn I which did not recognize application of state law to monitoring by the State Engineer. Justice ThomasConcedes that Tribal sovereignty exists over the diminished portion of the reservation, but concludes that pragmatic solution is for state engineer to regulate over this area, too.