Laserfiche WebLink
<br />~.~~:--. ...:..~: <br /> <br />for fish propagation and hydropower generation to determine if the following interests had <br />been adequately considered: <br /> <br />(1) fish and wildlife habitat; <br />(2) protection of aquatic life; <br />(3) recreation; <br />(4) aesthetic beauty; <br />(5) navigation; <br />(6) water quality; <br />(7) access to public waters; <br />(8) minimum stream flows; <br />(9) waste prevention; and <br />(10) the promotion of conservation. <br /> <br />Although developing a comprehensive list of public interest considerations, the <br />court went further in suggesting the differential manner in which the factors should be <br />weighed: <br />The relevant elements and their relative weights will vary with local needs, <br />circumstances, and interests. For example, in an area heavily dependent on <br />recreation and tourism or specifically devoted to preservation in its natural <br />state, the Department of Water Resources may give great consideration to <br />the aesthetic and environmental ramifications of granting a permit which <br />calls for substantive modification of the landscape or the stream. (707 P.2d at <br />450) <br />Further emphasizing the subjective nature of public interest considerations, the court <br />determined that "what elements of the public interest are impacted. and what the public <br />interest requires. is committed to the Department of Water Resources' sound discretion: <br />(707 P.2d at 450) <br /> <br />9 <br />