Laserfiche WebLink
<br />OOl~91 <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />toward accelerated IdentificatIon deadlines, litigation and adjudication <br />of water rights, all of which will directly affect and Involve federal <br />water rights. <br /> <br />-, <br /> <br />The Task Force has focused on the shortcomings of the approach <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />historically made to water rights by many federal agencIes. The <br /> <br />Importance of securing the rights necessary to carry out federal resource <br /> <br />management programs has been readily acknowledged, yet that acknowledgment <br /> <br />has neither consIstently nor systematically been translated Into compre- <br /> <br />henslve action programs Inside agencies to IdentIfy and quantify those <br /> <br />rights. Instead, many agencies have by and large responded only when <br /> <br />required to do so by litigation -- either In stream adjudications or <br /> <br />In IndIvidual cIrcumstances where a valuable federal resource Is <br /> <br />threatened. 22/ <br /> <br />Apart from such litIgation. for whatever reasons, there has never <br /> <br />been a uniform polley among the federal land management agencies re- <br /> <br />gardlng the extent to which the Federal Government should or would comply <br /> <br />with state laws and procedures In acquIring water rights, or give notice <br /> <br />to appropriate state agencies or officials of the water needs and uses <br /> <br />of the agency. <br /> <br />Some agencies have adopted policIes regarding compliance with state <br /> <br />laws and have attempted In varyIng degrees over the years to make their <br /> <br />~/ See,~. Cappaert v. United States. 426 U.S. 128 (1976) (Devll's <br />Hole Pupflsh). <br /> <br />-21- <br />