中间图

Or
icon
OG20官方指南,建议同学们刷3遍。第一遍做题了解题型和考点,第二遍精刷,第三遍集中解决疑难问题。建议考生第一遍刷题采用官方正版纸质书籍,若遇到疑难问题,欢迎在此专区查阅解析,提供解析,参与题目讨论,与所有考生一起解决疑难问题。
阅读RC-17024 (第1/8题) Time Cost00:00
收藏
该题平均耗时:4m55s,平均正确率:65%

建议使用官方纸质指南,查看对照完整题目

In Winters v. United States (1908), the Supreme Court held that the right to use waters flowing through or adjacent to the 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 ruled that the federal government, when it created the reservation, intended to deal fairly with American Indians by reserving for them the waters without which their lands would have been useless. Later decisions, citing Winters, established that courts can find federal rights to reserve water for particular purposes if (1)the land in question lies within an enclave under exclusive federal jurisdiction; (2) the land has been formally withdrawn from federal public lands— i.e., withdrawn from the stock of federal lands available for private use under federal land use laws-and set aside or reserved; and (3) the circumstances reveal the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 intended to reserve water as well as land when establishing the reservation.

Some American Indian tribes have also established water rights 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 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 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constituted a part of federal public lands; in any event, no treaty, statute, or executive order has ever designated or withdrawn the pueblos from public lands as American Indian reservations. This fact, however, has not barred application of the Winters doctrine. What constitutes an American Indian 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 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 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, the year in which pueblos must be considered to have become reservations.

【OG20-P418-502题】

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

  • 分析A选项
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • 分析B选项
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • 分析C选项
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • 分析D选项
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • 分析E选项
    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
该题目由网友y4fEdgA提供。更多GMAT题目请
暂无雷哥网文字解析
当前版本由 386467yohwo 更新于2020-01-18 00:52:48 感谢由 386467yohwo 对此题目的解答所做出的贡献。

1. W v US case: right to use water near India Reservation was reserved to American Indians by the tready (established by the reservation)
tready: not mention water right-federal government: reserve-nevertheless the land would be useless
federal rights to reserve water for particular use:
-the land in question
-the land has been formally withdraw from federal public lands
-the government intended to reserve water and land when esablishing the reservation
2. American Indian tribes用另外的方式获得water rights<-traditional diversion and use of waters prior to the US's acq of soverrignty
eg. RG pueblos exists before-not constitute a part of federal publiclands
apply of winter doctrine: what constitutes an American Indian reservation
-pueblos->reservation
 A v C reservation creation manner not affect the application of winter doctrine->pueblow: priority to use water over other citizens


题目讨论 10条评论)

用户头像
提交
  • 用户头像

    ziqi

    紧接着就是Although this treaty did not mention water rights,
    0 0 回复 2022-03-30 16:55:44
  • 用户头像

    ByeByeG

    Although this treaty did not mention water rights 同义改写
    0 0 回复 2022-02-14 16:11:24
  • 用户头像

    389949ccju

    无语真的无语。。
    0 0 回复 2022-01-21 19:29:07
  • 用户头像

    474700rock

    答案在第二句里找 “Although this treaty did not mention water rights...”
    0 0 回复 2021-11-23 17:17:45
  • 用户头像

    虫0515

    https://forum.chasedream.com/thread-912701-1-1.html 贴个详解
    0 0 回复 2021-11-02 22:06:37
    • 评论用户头像

      355266qgmd回复虫0515

      失效了

      0 0 回复 2021-11-19 10:29:29

  • 用户头像

    酒仙桥程潇

    太难了呜呜呜
    1 0 回复 2021-09-01 15:40:14
  • 用户头像

    449760bmlb

    做个人吧..
    3 0 回复 2021-07-11 21:36:17
  • 用户头像

    226223ub

    太难了呜呜呜呜
    0 0 回复 2021-06-19 18:31:15
  • 用户头像

    1485405wibx

    好家伙,不愧是gmat巅峰之作
    3 0 回复 2021-05-05 16:16:56
    • 评论用户头像

      205838uqks回复1485405wibx

      真的看不懂。何以知道是巅峰之作?不过您这么说我倒觉得是种安慰

      0 0 回复 2021-09-10 21:26:06

  • 用户头像

    Edward.

    文章大意

    Treaty判定印第安人保留水权。在三种特殊情况下,联邦政府有水权。

    印第安人确实拥有水权。

     

    1. 细节题

    定位第二句although部分


    0 0 回复 2021-04-23 15:26:15
  • 手机注册
  • 邮箱注册
登录>







关闭图标

标题图

  • 图标

    知识库学习

    GMAT语法、逻辑、阅读、数学各单项备考知识点学习及测验
  • 图标

    在线做题

    包含GMAT各单项必考知识点题目、OG/PREP/GWD/雷哥讲义题目、难度650/680/700/730题库题目练习及题目解析
  • 图标

    在线模考

    语文套题/数学套题/全套仿真模考,包含GWD/PERP/精选模考等上百套套题模考
  • 图标

    在线测评

    适合5种不同基础的GMAT学员,测评后可自动出具分数报告及复习计划指导
  • 图标

    资料下载

    GMAT必备备考资料下载、鸡精下载、课程课件等免费下载
  • 图标

    课程学习

    注册会员后,可在GMAT课程区,选择免费直播课程及公开课程进行在线学习
×
请你选择你要查看的模考成绩单
立即开通 暂不开通
加载图片
网络异常