Official Explanations
1. According to the passage, which of the following was true of the treaty establishing the Fort Belknap 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B. It was rescinded by the federal government, an action that gave rise to the Winters case.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.
Supporting ideasThis question requires recognizing information that is explicitly stated in the passage. In the first sentence, the passage states that the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation was established by treaty. The following sentence begins by stating that this treaty did not mention water rights (lines 4-5); in other words, the right to use the water flowing through the reservation was not established by treaty.
A. Although the Supreme Court ruled on water rights for the reservation established by the treaty, there is no evidence in the passage that the treaty itself was ever challenged in the Supreme Court.
B. Although the Winters case resulted in water rights for the reservation established by the treaty, there is no evidence in the passage that the treaty was ever rescinded.
C. The passage does not mention American Indians’ traditional resource use as being tied to the treaty establishing the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation.
D. Correct. The passage states explicitly that the treaty establishing the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation did not mention the right to use water flowing through the reservation.
E. The passage does not mention the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation or the treaty that established it in relation to Arizona v. California.
The correct answer is D.
2. The passage suggests that, if the criteria discussed in lines 8–17 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 Belknap 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 reservewater for a particular purpose.
InferenceAnswering this question requires making an inference based on information given in the passage. The question focuses on lines 8-17, where the passage provides a summary of the criteria used by the U.S. courts to establish water rights. The passage then explains that the Rio Grande pueblos used other means to establish water rights, noting that what constitutes an American Indian reservation is a question of practice, not of legal definition (lines 34–36). This strongly implies that establishing water rights for the Rio Grande pueblos required reference to legal language not contained in the criteria described in lines 8-17.
A. Since the passage says that decisions setting the criteria in lines 8-17 cited the Winters case—which gave water rights to the Fort Belknap Indian Reservation—one can infer that the Fort Belknap reservation met all of those criteria.
B. The criteria in lines 8-17 do not touch on specific dates of the transfer of sovereignty over particular lands.
C. Correct. The passage demonstrates that for the Rio Grande pueblos, it was necessary to establish water rights based on criteria not contained in lines 8-17
D. The criteria described in lines 8-17 are not specific only to lands reserved for American Indians.
E. The passage illustrates that Winters established water rights in the absence of any explicit mention of water rights in the treaty.
The correct answer is C.
3. Which of the following most accurately summarizes the relationship between Arizona v. California in lines 32-35, and the criteria citing the Winters doctrine in lines 8-17?
A. Arizona v. California abolishes these criteria and establishes a competing set of criteria for applying the Winters doctrine.
B. Arizona v. California establishes that the Winters doctrine applies to a broader range of situations than those defined by these criteria.
C. Arizona v. California represents the sole example of an exception to the criteria as they were set forth in the Winters doctrine.
D. Arizona v. California does not refer to the Winters doctrine to justify water rights, whereas these criteria do rely on the Winters doctrine.
E. Arizona v. California applies the criteria derived from the Winters doctrine only to federal lands other than American Indian reservations.
InferenceThis question requires inferring how one part of the passage bears on another part of the passage. The two parts referred to are the criteria described in lines 8-17 and Arizona v. California, which is referred to in lines 32-35. Arizona v. California shows that the establishment of water rights need not be tied to any previous legal definition of reservation lands but may be tied to the U.S. government’s practice merely of treating the land as reserved for American Indians. The criteria described in lines 8-17 apply to situations in which the land in question has been legally identified as reservation land. So Arizona v. California broadened the scope of Winters in establishing water rights.
A. The passage illustrates that Arizona v. California does not supersede or deny any of the criteria in lines 8-17
B. Correct. The passage suggests that practice and not legal definition allows Winters to be applied to situations not covered by the criteria in lines 8-17
C. In stating that some American Indian tribes have also established water rights by means other than the criteria in lines 10–20, the first sentence of the second paragraph makes clear that Arizona v.California is not the sole exception to the criteria.
D. The passage states that Arizona v. California does refer to Winters.
E. The passage illustrates that Arizona v. California was directly relevant to the Pueblo Indians’ water rights.
The correct answer is B.
4. The “pragmatic approach” mentioned in lines 37–38 of the passage is best defined as one that
A. grants recognition to reservations that were never formally established but that have traditionally been treated as such
B. determines the water rights of all citizens in a particular region by examining the actual history of water usage in that region
C. gives federal courts the right to reserve water along with land even when it is clear that the government originally intended to reserve only the land
D. bases the decision to recognize the legal rights of a group on the practical effect such a recognition is likely to have on other citizens
E. dictates that courts ignore precedents set by such cases as Winters v. United States in deciding what water rights belong to reserved land
Supporting ideasThis question requires recognizing what a particular phrase in the passage is referring to. The pragmatic approach the question refers to is introduced by the passage as this pragmatic approach. It is therefore necessary to identify which approach the passage has already referred to in this context, which in this case is contained in the sentence just prior to the reference. This sentence states that establishing what is an American Indian reservation is a matter of the U.S. government’s practice and not of any formal, legal definition.
A. Correct. The approach referred to as pragmatic involves establishing American Indian reservations based not on formal law but on the government’s established practice of treating the lands as such.
B. The approach referred to as pragmatic is not specific to establishing water rights.
C. The approach referred to as pragmatic is not specific to establishing water rights.
D. The approach referred to as pragmatic does not refer to balancing the rights of some people with rights of others.
E. The approach referred to as pragmatic is shown to be consistent with and supportive of the rights established by Winters.
The correct answer is A.
5. 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
EvaluationAnswering this question involves recognizing how a particular part of the passage functions within thepassage as a whole. The passage illustrates in the first paragraph that Winters was cited in the
establishment of water rights based on a set of criteria that included the formal withdrawal of lands by the government. In the second paragraph, the case of the Rio Grande pueblos is introduced as an example of lands that had never been formally withdrawn by the government, raising the question of whether Winters would still be applicable in such situations. The passage then asserts that the situation of the pueblos has not barred (line 33) the application of Winters.
A. Correct. While the passage affirms the application of Winters to the situation with the pueblos, it recognizes that it may initially appear that Winters does not apply.
B. The passage states explicitly that the United States did gain official sovereignty over pueblo lands in 1848, when they became part of the United States (lines 27–28).
C. The passage states explicitly that the pueblo lands never formally constituted a part of federal public lands (lines 28–30) and takes no stand on the issue of whether particular lands ought to be
considered public lands.
D. While one can infer that the rights of other citizens to use water could be limited by reserving water rights for residents of American Indian lands according to the Winters doctrine, the passage takes no stand on this issue.
E. The passage does not mention the rights of federal courts to claim jurisdiction over particular water rights cases.
The correct answer is A.
6. The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. trace the development of laws establishing American Indian reservations
B. explain the legal basis 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
Main ideaThis question requires recognizing the main topic of the passage, which is about the establishment of water rights on American Indian lands. Its intent is to explain or describe, and it does not take sides on any issue.
A. The passage is primarily about establishing water rights, not establishing reservations.
B. Correct. The passage is an explanation of water rights on American Indian lands.
C. The passage describes legal criteria used to establish water rights on American Indian lands but does not take issue with them.
D. The passage does not discuss the earliest date for water rights on American Indian lands.
E. The passage is primarily about establishing water rights, not about types of reservations.
The correct answer is B.
6. The passage suggests that the legal rights of citizens other than American Indians to the use of water flowing into the Rio Grande pueblos are
A. guaranteed by the precedent set in Arizona v. California
B. abolished by the Winters doctrine
C. deferred to the Pueblo Indians whenever treaties explicitly require this
D. guaranteed by federal land-use laws
E. limited by the prior claims of the Pueblo Indians
InferenceAnswering this question requires recognizing what the passage implies. The passage illustrates at the beginning of the second paragraph that water rights were granted to Pueblo Indians based on their use of the water in the Rio Grande pueblos prior to U.S. sovereignty. The passage also later states that since the Winters doctrine applies, the water rights of Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water rights as of 1848 (lines 42–44), which implies that the water rights of citizens other than Pueblo Indians are limited.
A. The passage illustrates that Arizona v. California reinforced the water rights of citizens residing on American Indian reservations; it does not imply a precedent ensuring water rights for other citizens.
B. The passage states that the water rights of citizens other than Pueblo Indians are lower in priority, not abolished altogether.
C. The passage does not mention that different water rights have been defined by different treaties.
D. The passage does not mention that the water rights of citizens other than Pueblo Indians are guaranteed on pueblo lands.
E. Correct. The passage states that the water rights of Pueblo Indians have priority over other citizens’ water rights, which thereby limits the rights of those citizens.
The correct answer is E.
close
Updated on: 12 Jun 2020, 02:45
57%
(03:34) wrong 
35%
(medium)
-- the "pragmatic approach" of the Winters doctrine. Arizona v. CA moved that pragmatic approach beyond the explicit criteria that were stated in Winters v US. This fits the purpose of paragraph 2, which is to show how the Winters doctrine has been used to establish water rights for American Indians, even when the waters were not part of a legally defined reservation.
