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.

（b.美国印第安属地的问题更多考量的是实际情况，而不是法律问题。）

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.

（c.另一Arizona案件也是支持上述说法。）

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.

（总结：因此，印第安部落水权优先于公民水权。）

• 直播预告 | 埃森哲企业数字化转型论坛·两化融合深度行
• 42股成功跨越3000点，三维度解析牛股基因（附9月十大金股）
• 【深度长文】规模大赚钱就是好公司？政府要推动最基础的大国重器
• 解析 | 客观看事件！专家为你剖析“两潮地区”水情的几大原因！
• 当众人夺路而跑时，不跟随——投资高手们的深度思考
• 新疆喀什伽师县发生5.5级地震 震源深度8千米
• 台湾花莲发生4.3级地震 震源深度17.7公里
• 亲人不睦，家必败！（深度好文）
• “将有温度有深度有力度的中国故事讲给非洲受众”
• 穷人在抢房，富人在抢命！（深度好文）