Laserfiche WebLink
<br />003281 <br /> <br />II <br /> <br />THE GENERAL CONCLUSION OF OUR LEGAL ADVISORS IS THAT STATES CAN <br /> <br />IMPOSE LIMITATIONS ON WATER TRANSFER OUTSIDE THE STATE BOUNDARIES <br /> <br />SO LONG AS THE LIMITATION IS TIED TO A LEGITIMATE MANAGEMENT <br /> <br />OBJECTIVE, SUCH AS WATER CONSERVATION, AND SO LONG AS THE STATE <br />DOES NOT DISCRIMINATE AGAINST OUT-OF-STATE USERS. <br /> <br />BUT COURTS HAVE A WAY OF SOLVING ONLY PIECES OF A PUZZLE AND NOT <br /> <br />THE WHOLE THING. <br /> <br />WE STILL DO NOT KNOW WHAT KINDS OF MANAGEMENT <br />.' <br /> <br />OBJECTIVES WILL QUALIFY AS SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW STATES TO RESTRICT <br /> <br />OUT-OF-STATE TRANSFER--OR THE EXTENT TO WHICH ,A STATE MAY REGULATE <br /> <br />USE OF WATER ORIGINATING IN THAT STATE BUT USED IN ANOTHER. <br /> <br />WE IN THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT HAVE BEEN ENCOURAGING STATES TO TRY <br /> <br />TO RESOLVE INTERSTATE WATER ISSUES THEMSELVES, EITHER INDIVIDUALLY <br /> <br />OR COLLECTIVELY. OUR ANALYSTS DISCOVERED THAT THE LAWS OF AT <br /> <br />LEAST 14 STATES (AMONG THEM ARIZQNA, CALIFORNIA, COLORADO, NEVADA, <br /> <br /> <br />NEW MEXICO, AND UTAH) HAD PROVISIONS WHICH PROHIBITED OR OTHERWISE <br /> <br />LIMITED INTERSTATE GROUNDWATER SHIPMENTS. AFTER SPORHASE AND <br /> <br />EL PASO, THE STATE LEGISLATURES OF NEW MEXICO AND COLORADO MODIFIED <br />THEIR LAWS TO CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH BY THE COURTS. <br />THE NEBRASKA SUPREME COURT HAS SEVERED FROM THE STATE CONSTITUTION <br /> <br />THE WORDING DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL BY THE U.S. SUPREME COURT <br /> <br />IN SPORHASE. <br /> <br />C-16 <br /> <br />~~ <br />