Ninth Circuit Decides Pyramid Lake Paiute v. Nevada — Water for Wetlands Appeal

Here are the materials in Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe of Indians v. Nevada Dept. of Wildlife:

CA9 Opinion

Nevada Dept. of Wildlife Opening Brief

Nevada State Engineer Opening Brief

Nevada Water Fowl Assn Opening Brief

Federal Answer Brief

Pyramid Lake Paiute Answer Brief

The court’s syllabus:

Affirming the district court’s judgment, the panel held that the district court correctly  concluded that diversion of water for waterfowl habitat is not “irrigation” within the meaning of the federal court Alpine decree governing water rights in the Newlands Reclamation Project.

This appeal concerns applications filed by the Nevada Department of Wildlife and the Nevada Waterfowl Association to transfer water rights from agricultural  land in the Newlands Project to the Carson Lake and Pasture, a wildlife refuge located within the Lahontan Valley wetlands at the terminus of the Carson River. Because the  applicants proposed to use the transferred water to support the growth of plants used by wildlife, they argued that the intended use of water at Carson Lake and Pasture  constituted irrigation. The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe and the United States protested the applications.

Determining that the Tribe had standing, the panel held that both the Alpine Decree and the Nevada water code speak of irrigation solely in the context of agriculture and distinguish such use from the application of water for recreational, aesthetic, and wildlife purposes. Therefore, the panel agreed with the district court that the State Engineer’s approval of the applications to transfer the non-consumptive use portion of the applicants’ water rights violated Administrative Provision VII of the Alpine Decree because the applications sought a change in the manner of use to a non-irrigation purpose.