Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />present sources of supply, conflicts between the States and the Federal <br />Government over the control and use of water are growing sharper <br />and more serious. The problem is a national one, but its threat is <br />especially grave in the public land States of the semiarid West, where <br />not only is water even more scarce than elsewhere in our country <br />but where Federal ownership of millions upon millions of acres of <br />land give the Federal Government an asserted basis for claiming <br />proprietorship, 'paramount rights, ' or title in fee simple absolute <br />to all unappropriated waters in many of our States, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Inevitably, such sweeping claims by the Federal Govern- <br />ment might retard State plans and projects for development of their <br />own water resources to meet local needs and conditions for their <br />own citizens in accordance with their own lacal law and custom, <br />As a result, all of our people everywhere are the losers, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />II >:~)~ * >:~ <br /> <br />"Senate Resolution 48 directs the committee to 'make ex- <br />haustive studies of the extent to which water resources activities <br />in the United States are related to the national interests,' Clearly, <br />Federal-State conflicts, if they retard water resource develop- <br />ment, are 'water resource activities related to the national interest,' <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"The broadening pattern of these conflicts is conclusive <br />proof of the urgent need for clear-cut, definitive action on the part <br />of Congress to work out with the States a redefining of Federal- <br />State powers and responsibilities for control, use, and develop- <br />ment of water resources, The Federal Government should not <br />hamstring the States in the States I efforts to develop their water <br />resources to meet the needs of their people. Neither should the <br />States hamstring the Federal Government in its efforts to fulfill <br />its functions within the Constitution, " <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />It is most interesting that Congress has seen fit to enact 17 different acts <br />of general application between 1866 and 1954 recognizing in one way o.r another <br />the application of State law in governing the use of the water resources in the <br />public land States, The Western States have relied particularly on the Acts of <br />1866, 1870 and the Desert Land Act of 1877. Another major piece of legislation <br />is Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902, which states: <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting or <br />intended to affect or to in any way interfere with the laws of any <br />State or Territory relating to the control, appropriation, use, <br />or distribution of water used in irrigation, or any vested right <br />acquired thereunder and the Secretary of the Interior, in carry- <br />ing out the provisions of this Act, shall proceed in conformity <br />with such laws " ,~ ,~ ,~. " <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In general, and to the best of my knowledge, there is not one single instance <br />in which Congress has enacted legislation, respecting the consumptive use of <br />water in the Western States, that provided other than that the necessary water <br />rights should be acquired or established pursuant to State law, <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />In the past, we in the Western States have not always presented a united <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />- 15 - <br /> <br />,..~ <br />