Dylanvir
Nevada

the instruments

Written elsewhere, still binding

17 legal instruments that govern something important in Nevada and were not made by Nevada, from 1848 to 1990. Each is coded by the forum that produced it and by whether Nevada had anybody in the room.

⚠ This table was written before its rows were counted, and the claim in its header was wrong: it said Nevada was mostly absent. Nevada was mostly present — 12 of 17 had a Nevada party at the table or holding the pen. The correction is kept in the file with the original beside it, because the reason it survived is the interesting part. Nothing imported this module, so nothing ever contradicted it.

forum × consentn = 17

The venue decides what kind of losing is available

Congressfederal courtcompactSupreme Courttreatyconsentrepresented by its opponent112Nevada opposed, and lost22Nevada not a party11Nevada wrote it22Nevada at the table5121110

reading itA filled square is an instrument; darker is more of them. A hairline square is a combination that has never once occurred — drawn rather than skipped, because in this table the empty cells are the finding. The number outside the grid is the row total.

what it shows15 of the 25 cells are empty, and they are empty in a pattern. Nevada opposed, and lost happens only in Congress (2 of 2); Nevada wrote it happens only in Congress (2 of 2). At the coarser grain of venue the lock is total: represented by its opponent only in a courtroom, Nevada opposed, and lost only in Congress, Nevada wrote it only in Congress. Nevada has never once been sold out by its own trustee outside a courtroom, and never once been overridden outside Congress. The venue is not a detail of how Nevada lost — it determines which way losing was available.

⚠ n = 17. Counts rather than percentages throughout — a percentage implies a precision 17 rows do not have. The coding is the volume's, and 'adverse-trustee' is the most editorial value in it: it names the United States acting as trustee for tribal water and for irrigators at the same time. The two rows carrying it say so in their notes.

consentn = 17

Nevada was in the room for 12 of 17 of them

Nevada at the table10represented by its opponent2Nevada opposed, and lost2Nevada wrote it2Nevada not a party1once

reading itBars are scaled to the whole table, not to the largest bar, so the grey remainder of each is the share of instruments that category does not cover. Gold marks the 5 where Nevada had no effective voice.

predictedThe module’s own header predicted that most instruments had no Nevada party with standing.

foundThe opposite. 12 of 17 had Nevada at the table or writing it. The story this table tells is not exclusion — it is that being in the room did not help. Nevada was a party to the Colorado River Compact, the Taylor Grazing Act, and the Tahoe compact, and each of them binds it now.

⚠ n = 17. Counts rather than percentages throughout — a percentage implies a precision 17 rows do not have.

durationn = 17

16 of 17 are still operative

1850190019502000Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo178yTreaty of Ruby Valley163yAdmission of Nevada162yBoundary act transferring land we…160yGeneral Mining Act154yCoinage Act153yReclamation Act124yColorado River Compact and Boulde…104yTaylor Grazing Act92yUnited States v. Orr Water Ditch …82yTahoe Regional Planning Compact57yFederal Land Policy and Managemen…50yCalifornia v. Nevada46yUnited States v. Alpine Land & Re…46yNevada v. United States43yNuclear Waste Policy Amendments A…39yTruckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water…36y

reading itHollow mark: the instrument is made. Filled mark: today, or the year it stopped operating. Dashed means spent — the one instrument here that no longer binds, the Coinage Act. The number is how many years it has been in force.

what it showsNothing expires. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo has bound this ground for 178 years and is still operative. And Nevada last wrote one of these in 1902 — the Reclamation Act. In the 124 years since, 10 more instruments were added to the pile and not one of them was Nevada’s to write.

⚠ n = 17. Counts rather than percentages throughout — a percentage implies a precision 17 rows do not have. Operative is coded as 'still has legal effect', not 'still argued about'. A statute can be operative and dormant.

all 17

InstrumentYearForumBindsNevada's partyConsent
Treaty of Guadalupe HidalgoThe ground changes hands. Nobody living on it is consulted, including the Numu, Newe and Wašiw who are its actual occupants.1848treatySovereignty over the land that becomes Nevadanone — no settlement existedNevada not a party
Treaty of Ruby ValleyA treaty of peace and friendship. It transfers no title, which is why Western Shoshone claims remain live 160 years later. The one instrument here where the Nevada party's own reading has never been accepted.1863treatyRelations with the Western Shoshone; famously NOT a land cessionWestern Shoshone signatoriesNevada at the table
Admission of NevadaAdmitted well under the usual population bar. The surviving motive is congressional margins for the Thirteenth Amendment, not the presidential election.1864CongressStatehood itselfterritorial delegatesNevada at the table
Boundary act transferring land west of the ColoradoTaken from Arizona Territory over Arizona's objection. Las Vegas and Laughlin sit on it. The root of the Arizona grievance that resurfaces at Parker Dam in 1934 and in Arizona v. California.1866CongressNevada's southern point, including all of what becomes Clark CountyNevada delegationNevada at the table
General Mining ActLocatable minerals to whoever stakes them, with no federal production royalty on hardrock to this day. The single largest transfer of value in the state's history, and the one Nevada wanted.1872CongressHardrock minerals on federal landNevada delegation, strongly supportiveNevada wrote it
Coinage ActThe 'Crime of '73'. Gutted the market for the state's product and made Nevada a free-silver state for thirty years. A Nevada senator helped pass the thing that ruined the Nevada economy.1873CongressDemonetisation of silverNevada delegation; Stewart voted for it and later repudiated itNevada at the tablespent
Reclamation ActThe Bureau's first project was on Newlands' own river. Nevada authored the instrument that dried its own lake.1902CongressFederal irrigation; creates the Bureau of ReclamationFrancis Newlands, its authorNevada wrote it
Colorado River Compact and Boulder Canyon Project ActCompact 1922, implementing act 1928. Nevada agreed to a small share when it had almost no population to use it. Return-flow credits later made indoor use nearly free, which is why the southern conservation programme is entirely about outdoor water.1922compactNevada's Colorado River allocation, the smallest of seven statesNevada commissionersNevada at the table
Taylor Grazing ActAllocated range to holders of deeded base property. Ended itinerant herding without naming a single Basque.1934CongressGrazing on the federal public domainstock interests, largely supportiveNevada at the table
United States v. Orr Water Ditch Co.Filed 1913, decreed 1944, enforced twice. Held preclusive against the Tribe's later claim, affirmed by the Supreme Court in 1983. The type specimen for this whole table.1944federal courtAll Truckee River rights in NevadaPyramid Lake Reservation, represented by the United States — which simultaneously represented the Newlands Projectrepresented by its opponent
Tahoe Regional Planning CompactRatified by Congress. A bi-state authority with real power over development, and perpetually contested by owners and local government. Nevada's third of the lake is governed jointly with California.1969compactLand use in the entire Tahoe basin, both statesNevada as compacting stateNevada at the table
Federal Land Policy and Management ActEnded the disposal policy. The state that expected eventually to receive its land was told it never would. The Sagebrush Rebellion follows three years later — this is its proximate cause and the date is rarely given.1976CongressPermanent federal retention of the public domainNevada delegation, opposedNevada opposed, and lost
California v. NevadaThe Court took the surveyed lines over the mathematically correct ones on grounds of long acquiescence. Nevada's border is where the surveyors put it.1980Supreme CourtThe western state lineState of NevadaNevada at the table
United States v. Alpine Land & Reservoir Co.The Carson's equivalent of Orr Ditch, thirty-six years later.1980federal courtCarson River rightsNevada water usersNevada at the table
Nevada v. United StatesIt does. The Tribe was bound by a judgment its own trustee negotiated while acting for the party taking its water. Recorded a loss of about 20,000 acres of lake surface.1983Supreme CourtWhether the 1944 decree bars a later fishery claimPyramid Lake Paiute Triberepresented by its opponent
Nuclear Waste Policy Amendments ActThe 'Screw Nevada' bill. Directly produces Bullfrog County six weeks later — a 144-square-mile county with no residents, invented as a taxing instrument.1987CongressDesignation of Yucca Mountain as the sole repository siteNevada delegation, opposed and outvotedNevada opposed, and lost
Truckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water Rights Settlement ActThe exception in this table. Negotiated with the losing party present and represented by its own counsel. Pyramid Lake has recovered roughly twenty feet since. Whatever else it shows, it shows the difference the consent column makes.1990CongressTruckee allocation, including water for Pyramid LakeNevada, California, the Tribe, Reno and Sparks — all at the tableNevada at the table