Laserfiche WebLink
<br />water development throughout the state, if the citizens of the North could <br /> <br /> <br />rely on the effectuation of such long-range plans, they would have no cause <br /> <br /> <br />to fear that a particular transfer of water would work to their future <br />detr iment. <br /> <br />"Another worrisome aspect of the present area of origin protection statutes <br />was the description of the area, watershed, or county of origin to be <br />protected. The Committee noted, for example, the difficulty of attempting <br />to reserve water to various upstream counties whose boundaries were <br />formed by a mutually contiguous stream. Was the reserved water to be <br />pro-rated among counties by size, population or economic development? <br />How was the reserved water to be allocated in the future if counties were <br />to experience different rates of growth? The statutes did not answer these <br />questions. <br /> <br />"Similar criticism was directed at the term 'watershed of origin.' The <br /> <br /> <br />definition of this term depends largely on one's frame of reference. <br /> <br /> <br />Obviously a watershed to one person might be considered merely part of a <br /> <br /> <br />larger watershed by someone else, if the first river eventually flowed into a <br /> <br /> <br />larger one. The Committee stated: <br /> <br />'. . . the construction of Oroville Dam on the Feather River illustrates the <br /> <br />future importance of the watersheds which are tributary to the Sacramento <br /> <br /> <br />River as the true 'watershed of or igin' to which the type of protection we <br /> <br /> <br />are considering should be extended and to which it should be limited. To <br /> <br /> <br />consider the entire Sacramento Valley as the watershed of origin .. would <br /> <br /> <br />be quite impractical.' <br /> <br />-20- <br />