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 reservation.
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 useless.
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formally withdrawn from federal
public lands — i.e., withdrawn from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 available
for private use under federal
land use laws — and set aside or
reserved, and (3) the circumstances
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 executive
order has ever designated
or withdrawn the pueblos from
(50) public lands as American Indian
reservations. This fact, however,
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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q8:
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?
A. Suggest why it might have been argued that the Winters doctrine ought not to
apply to pueblo lands
B. Imply that the United States never really acquired sovereignty over pueblo lands
C. Argue that the pueblo lands ought still to be considered part of federal public
lands
D. Support the argument that the water rights of citizens other than American Indians
are limited by the Winters doctrine
E. Suggest that federal courts cannot claim jurisdiction over cases disputing the
traditional diversion and use of water by Pueblo Indians
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q9:
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?
A. The water rights of the inhabitants of the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation would
not take precedence over those of other citizens.
B. Reservations established before 1848 would be judged to have no water rights.
C. There would be no legal basis for the water rights of the Rio Grande pueblos.
D. Reservations other than American Indian reservations could not be created with
reserved water rights.
E. Treaties establishing reservations would have to mention water rights explicitly in
order to reserve water for a particular purpose.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q10:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of the treaty establishing the
Fort Berthold Indian Reservation?
A. It was challenged in the Supreme Court a number of times.
B. It was rescinded by the federal government, an action that gave rise to the Winters
case.
C. It cited American Indians’ traditional use of the land’s resources.
D. It failed to mention water rights to be enjoyed by the reservation’s inhabitants.
E. It was modified by the Supreme Court in Arizona v. California.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q11:
The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. trace the development of laws establishing American Indian reservations
B. explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes
C. question the legal criteria often used to determine the water rights of American
Indian tribes
D. discuss evidence establishing the earliest date at which the federal government
recognized the water rights of American Indians
E. point out a legal distinction between different types of American Indian
reservations

shit...this one just knocked me off...

i am going wth

C
B
D
B

pls post OA..i wont be able to sleep until then

Vk please post OA

Guys,

OA = A/ C/ D/ B

This RC was painful!

Thanks!

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 reservation.
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 available
for private use under federal
land use laws — and set aside or
reserved, and (3) the circumstances
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 executive
order has ever designated
or withdrawn the pueblos from
(50) public lands as American Indian
reservations. This fact, however,
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.

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


Q25:
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?

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q26:
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?

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q27:
According to the passage, which of the following was true of the treaty establishing the
Fort Berthold Indian Reservation?

A. It was challenged in the Supreme Court a number of times.
B. It was rescinded by the federal government, an action that gave rise to the Winters
case.
C. It cited American Indians’ traditional use of the land’s resources.
D. It failed to mention water rights to be enjoyed by the reservation’s inhabitants.
E. It was modified by the Supreme Court in Arizona v. California.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q28:

The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. trace the development of laws establishing American Indian reservations
B. explain the legal bases for the water rights of American Indian tribes
C. question the legal criteria often used to determine the water rights of American
Indian tribes
D. discuss evidence establishing the earliest date at which the federal government
recognized the water rights of American Indians
E. point out a legal distinction between different types of American Indian
reservations

This was already posted here rc-winters-v-united-states-wanttotakeashotatthiskillerrc-67133.html

thank u - both the topics are now merged

marked E E D B
i.e. 2/4

Okay first two questions are way tough and didnt find anyone here getting at right answer.
hope these kindda stay away from GMAT.
_________________

Practice Practice and practice...!!

If my reply /analysis is helpful-->please press KUDOS
If there's a loophole in my analysis--> suggest measures to make it airtight.

Its is very close. But IMO it does not actually "question" it actually "explains"

Different criteria are explained in the passage. Validity of none is questioned. Hope this helps