My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP12185
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
12000-12999
>
WSP12185
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/29/2009 7:29:25 AM
Creation date
10/12/2006 5:25:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8067
Description
Section D General Federal Issues/Policies-Section 7 Consultations
Date
6/1/1979
Title
Federal Water Rights 1973-83-Report of Federal Task Force on Non-Indian Reserved Rights
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Report/Study
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
86
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />OOU137 <br /> <br />Thus a credible argument can be made that the existence of non- <br /> <br />. ~ <br /> <br />Indian federal water rights does not, In most cases, threaten existing <br /> <br />non-federal rights. To the extent federal rights remain uncertain, of <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />course, they cast a cloud on other water uses which the Federal <br /> <br />Government should strive to remove, but overall there Is ample reason <br /> <br />for the belief that the vast majority of federal water rights can be <br /> <br />perfected without Impairment of existing uses.~1 <br /> <br />H. Identification and QuantIfication of Reserved Rights Will <br />Not End All Uncertainty <br /> <br />It must be recognized that the existence of unquantlfled federal <br /> <br />reserved rights Is not the only uncertainty In the administration of the <br /> <br />water resources within states. Some states do not require permits <br /> <br />or other recordation to claim the right to use water. The result of <br /> <br />this lack of recordation Is that the rights to use water In many of the <br /> <br />watersheds In the West have not been adjudicated, and some may be "over- <br /> <br />appropriated;" I.e., there are more claims for the rIght to use the <br /> <br />waters In a particular stream than there Is water In the stream.121 <br /> <br />181 Professor Trelease, after describing the Colorado adjudications <br />In some detail, concludes that because the actual federal water <br />rights Involved were comparatively small, the problem Is not <br />nearly so large as many thInk. Trelease, 2R' clt., 54 Denver L. <br />J. at 491-92 (1977), <br /> <br />121 For example, several states Informed the Task Force that they believe <br />many of their streams are fully appropriated at certain times of the year; <br />e.g., New Mexico (virtually all); South Dakota (certain ones); Idaho <br />(numerous ones). New Mexico reports, In fact, that numerous streams have <br />"experienced shortages." which suggests overapproprlatlon. Other states <br />report that they cannot tel I whether streams are overapproprlated be- <br />cause they do not maintain comprehensive records of water rights (e.g., <br />Montana, Washington, California) although It Is likely that some are fully <br />appropriated (Callfornlal. <br /> <br />-17- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.