WSP10526 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The approval by the people of California of a $1,750,000,000 bond issue and the appropriation by the State Legislature of a major portion of the State's tidelands revenues, has provided the financia1'meansfor the construction of the facilities to develop the waters of the FRPA and to transport such waters from the areas of surplus to the areas of need, Construction is now proceeding on schedule, I I - 14 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Each of you, having been confronted in your own State with the many diverse water interests and. problems to finan.ce water projects , can best evaluate the success of the California water development p~ogram, . However, the ultimate success of that program is not in the building ~f the project facilities, but in the delivery of the water, It is here that the Federal-State water rights problem presents unknown risks - casting clouds of dotibt. If the claims of those sup- porting the Federal views are sustained, and water originating on Federa11ands - which constitute the major watersheds of the Western States - is owned and under the control of the Federal Government, then most of the so-called existing water rights and the water rights under State laws to appropriate and develop unappro- priated water will be subordinate to Federal development and use of water, Needed water development should not be depenp.ent on "Squatter's Rights", The impact of such Federal claims, whi9h bring into question over 100 years of accepted water rights under our State: laws, has been startling to all of us, I am not a defeatist, In fact, as a practical matter, I believe this Federal- State water rights problem is more legalistic than real. An attorney always claims the maximum for his client and that is just what the attorneys represent- ing the Federal interest have done, However, as long as there are legal ques- tions as to water rights, such questions will result in costly litigation, and needed water development by local, State and Federal authorities will be un- neces sari1y burdened. A law is to be judged not by how it is ad~inistered, but by how it could be administered, Water development in the Western States must not be left at the sufferance or policy determination of the Federal Government and its represent- atives. The inportance of establishing water rights under State law without the cloud of the legal and administrative claims of the Federal Government is vital to the best interests of our several States .and their water users, In fact, a determination of this problem is obviously in t,he national interest, If needed water development in the West~rn States is to proceed in time to support the existing and future growth econom~es of our Western States, there must be a maximum of cooperation between FElderal, State and local water in- terests, The jGlb is so big, and the need so urgent, it will require maximum water development within the capabilities of all agencies of government -Federal, State and local. This is not a partisan or political question. Both Democrats and Republi- cans joined in the report of the Senate Select Committee on National Water Re- sources and 17 United States Senators, joined iin the summary recommendations, emphasizing the need for a clarification of the! Federal position in connection with water rights, The Committee's report itself places an "urgency label" upon the problem and puts the need for clarification in the strongest frame of reference as follows: "With demand for water far outreaching increases in