## Facts

- Stampede Dam and Reservoir, a federal reclamation facility, is located on the Little Truckee River in California; the Little Truckee feeds the Truckee River, which flows into Nevada and terminates at Pyramid Lake on the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe’s reservation.
- The Secretary of the Interior operated Stampede to maintain river and lake conditions supporting the cui-ui and Lahontan cutthroat trout, listed as endangered or threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA).
- Carson-Truckee Water Conservancy District and Sierra Pacific Power Company sought a declaration that the Secretary violated the Washoe Project Act and related reclamation laws by refusing to sell Stampede water under long-term municipal and industrial (M&I) contracts for use in Reno and Sparks.
- Nevada sought a ruling that the Secretary had to obtain a permit from the Nevada State Engineer to operate Stampede.
- The Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe intervened supporting the Secretary, citing the importance of flows to Pyramid Lake and its fisheries.
- The district court largely upheld the Secretary’s position; the plaintiffs appealed and the Tribe cross-appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the Washoe Project Act and related reclamation laws required the Secretary to sell Stampede Reservoir water for M&I use, notwithstanding ESA obligations tied to protection of listed fish species.
2. Whether Nevada could require the Secretary to obtain a Nevada water permit to operate Stampede Dam, a federal facility located in California, where operations affect downstream Nevada waters.
3. Whether federal ESA duties and related federal or tribal water interests limit the application of state water permitting and asserted expectations of non-federal water users.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit held the Secretary did not violate the Washoe Project Act or related reclamation laws by refusing to enter long-term M&I contracts for Stampede water.
- The court treated the Washoe Project Act’s M&I provisions as discretionary and constrained by the Secretary’s ESA duties to avoid jeopardizing listed species.
- The court rejected Nevada’s claim that the Secretary must obtain a Nevada permit to operate Stampede for ESA and federal reclamation purposes.
- The court affirmed the core rulings upholding the Secretary’s operational authority and vacated limited portions of the district court’s relief that were unnecessary or insufficiently supported.

## Legal Principles

- ESA obligations may control federal project operations and can override conflicting expectations asserted under project-specific reclamation statutes.
- Where a reclamation statute authorizes, but does not command, water marketing or contracting, the Secretary retains discretion to decline sales, including to satisfy ESA conservation duties.
- State water permitting requirements cannot condition or restrict execution of federal statutory duties governing operation of a federal reclamation facility where state requirements conflict with federal law.
- Federal operation of water projects to protect ESA-listed species may also protect associated tribal interests in fisheries and lake levels; such federal interests further limit contrary state or non-federal demands.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit upheld the Secretary’s ESA-driven operation of Stampede Dam, ruling that the Washoe Project Act did not impose a mandatory duty to sell M&I water and that Nevada could not require a state permit for federal operations implementing ESA and related federal purposes, while vacating only limited, nonessential aspects of the district court’s relief.


Carson-Truckee Water Conservancy District v. Clark, 741 F.2d 257 (9th Cir. 1984)