GWD-2

       In Winters v. United States

       (1908), the Supreme Court held

       that the right to use waters flow-

Line       ing through or adjacent to the

  (5)       Fort Berthold Indian Reservation

was reserved to American Indians

by the treaty establishing the res-

ervation.  Although this treaty did

not mention water rights, the Court

 (10)      ruled that the federal government,

when it created the reservation,

intended to deal fairly with

American Indians by preserving

for them the waters without which

 (15)      their lands would have been use-

less.  Later decisions, citing

Winters, established that courts

can find federal rights to reserve

water for particular purposes if

 (20)      (1) the land in question lies within

       an enclave under exclusive federal

       jurisdiction, (2) the land has been

formally withdrawn from federal

public lands — i.e., withdrawn from

 (25)      the stock of federal lands avail-

able for private use under federal

land use laws — and set aside or

reserved, and (3) the circum-

stances reveal the government

 (30)      intended to reserve water as well

as land when establishing the

reservation.

             Some American Indian tribes

have also established water rights

 (35)      through the courts based on their

traditional diversion and use of

certain waters prior to the United

States’ acquisition of sovereignty.

For example, the Rio Grande

 (40)      pueblos already existed when the

United States acquired sovereignty

over New Mexico in 1848.  Although

they at that time became part of the

United States, the pueblo lands

 (45)      never formally constituted a part

of federal public lands; in any

event, no treaty, statute, or exec-

utive order has ever designated

or withdrawn the pueblos from

 (50)      public lands as American Indian

reservations.  This fact, how-

ever, has not barred application

of the Winters doctrine.  What

constitutes an American Indian

 (55)      reservation is a question of

practice, not of legal definition,

and the pueblos have always

been treated as reservations by

the United States.  This pragmatic

 (60)      approach is buttressed by Arizona

v. California (1963), wherein the

Supreme Court indicated that the

manner in which any type of federal

reservation is created does not

 (65)      affect the application to it of the

Winters doctrine.  Therefore, the

reserved water rights of Pueblo

Indians have priority over other

citizens’ water rights as of 1848,

 (70)      the year in which pueblos must

be considered to have become

reservations.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q23:     

The author cites the fact that the Rio Grande pueblos were never formally withdrawn from public lands primarily in order to do which of the following?

1. Suggest why it might have been argued that the Winters doctrine ought not to apply to pueblo lands
2. Imply that the United States never really acquired sovereignty over pueblo lands
3. Argue that the pueblo lands ought still to be considered part of federal public lands
4. Support the argument that the water rights of citizens other than American Indians are limited by the Winters doctrine
5. Suggest that federal courts cannot claim jurisdiction over cases disputing the traditional diversion and use of water by Pueblo Indians

Answer: A

怎么看出正确选项呢？我选了D

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Q24:     

The passage suggests that, if the criteria discussed in lines 16 – 32 were the only criteria for establishing a reservation’s water rights, which of the following would be true?

1. The water rights of the inhabitants of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation would not take precedence over those of other citizens.
2. Reservations established before 1848 would be judged to have no water rights.
3. There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos.
4. Reservations other than American Indian reservations could not be created with reserved water rights.
5. Treaties establishing reservations would have to mention water rights explicitly in order to reserve water for a particular purpose.

Answer: C

那三个criteria和C的选项有什么关系呢？

Q26:     

The primary purpose of the passage is to

1. trace the development of laws establishing American Indian reservations
2. explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes
3. question the legal criteria often used to determine the water rights of American Indian tribes
4. discuss evidence establishing the earliest date at which the federal government recognized the water rights of American Indians
5. point out a legal distinction between different types of American Indian reservations

Answer: B

这些选项都很混淆，弄不清，请帮帮忙，谢了