The U.S. Supreme Court’s “Winters” decision a century ago essentially says native Americans are entitled to the water they need. But “need” here is a pretty squishy thing, and we’re still sort out its implications. Matt Jenkins has a terrific piece in the latest High Country News about the Navajo piece of this puzzle – incredibly insightful in the areas I know a lot about, but also incredibly informative in areas I was not familiar with. Jenkins’ discussions of the differences within the Navajo community about how aggressive to be, and how much water to go after, are fascinating.
Michael Campana has a nice summary, with commentary.
John,
Thanks for the links. The High Country News article was fascinating with its echoes of local and national politics present and past.
It also brought up thoughts about:
“What is an Indian sovereign nation anyway?”
“How did the native Hawaiians leverage ownership of Waikiki into benefits for themselves?”
“Why did Mississippians think of themselves as millionaires in suing drug companies only to drive pharmacists and M.D.s from the state?”
Later