8093 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2-6 I I I I I, I I I I I I I I I I I I I I hand, Trout Unlimited may argue that the very purpose of its water right is destroyed by the reservoir, and that destruction should qualify as legal "injury." Who is right? The prior appropriation doctrine simply does not afford a clear answer.12 Who Benefits from Instream Flow Legislation? Traditionally, environmentalists have favored recognition of instream flow water rights, while other water users often have opposed their recognition. That is changing today. Instream flow rights benefit many entities, not just people interested in fishing and boating. For instance, instream flows. also may be used to protect multi-million dollar investments in water treatment systems (and to ensure compliance with permit requirements) which depend on a particular flow regime to assimilate treated waste. They also may be of critical use to developers who are required to undertake mitigation measures to offset the environmental impacts of their projects. For instance, without the opportunity to provide replacement wetlands and other enhancements, many developers may face denial of section 404 permits.13 Cities may make use of instream rights to protect their investment in parks and to make their communities more appealing to desirable new industries. Some homebuilders and commercial developers are beginning to recognize that protecting instream flows can add significantly to the attractiveness (and value) of their projects. Surprisingly, perhaps, agricultural users may be among the biggest beneficiaries. By enabling them to enter into leases and other voluntary arrangements which commit unneeded water rights to instream uses, they may protect themselves from forfeiture and abandonment actions while gaining a critical financial advantage. A viable state instream flow program serves also to protect the integrity of state law against federal preemption.14 Recognition of instream rights also reduces the temptation of courts to graft more radical reforms onto the prior appropriation doctrine. IS Last, but by no means least, those concerned with the exportation of water to out-of-state uses should know that water protected by instream rights is far more difficult to move out-of-state than is unappropriated water.16 In sum, viable instream flow programs should not be seen as threatening state control over the prior appropriation doctrine. Quite to the contrary, such programs may be the prior appropriation doctrine's best defense. Enforcement of State-held Instream Flow Rights by Other Persons Even if it is determined that only a state agency may appropriate water for instream purposes, there may, nevertheless, be a role for the public to play in the administration of such rights. Two "enforcement" questions may arise. First, may citizen