WSP00588 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. . o~~ policy. This is 'POliCY IJ(M in effect \~here the federal governrrent has participated in state adjudications and has waived the right to assert any aooitional or new reserved rights. The difficulty with this policy as to the effect on a subsequent administration as pointed out in the report, should be anphasized. Indeed, the present administration will not be in office when the policy v-uuld first be effectuated. A concern raised by the Depart:rrent of Justice as to I.;hether a President can relinquish property rights of the United states, is also worth of careful evaluation. An argwent might reasonably prevail to the effect that if the right is not identified un:1er the quantification of use pr=ess by the government, there is then, in fact, no further right to abandon or fail to assert. Further, the western states believe that national policy should be that the federal Executive should not assert any reserved rights to satisfy future needs, even for a reasonably "forseeable" peried, based on any presently existing reserved rights. The Western States \~ater CoW1cll also believes there is a good le:Jal argument that a reserved right is not an openended right. D. Creation of Reserved Rights in New Reservations .,.. 8. New federal water rights should, whenever possible, be established W1der state la\'l~ The Task Force has identified that serious problems are created by the rrcde in which federal reserved water rights have been created in the past. The Western States Water Council concurs with this conclusion. Therefore, it is very appropriate that a a:mprehensive lcok now be given to the way in which reserved water rights can be created in the future. As is p:linted out by the Task Force, this Administration carmot, even by founally instituted policy, such as an executive order, birrl another administration. It would, however I be a step in the right direction for the Executive to issue an order whereby no future reserved water rights are to be established by the Executive W1le~;s the right is precisely described in the order. A great mjority of reserved water rights, however, have been created by interpretations of legislation by attorneys of the Executive branch and by the Jlrlicial branch. The W:!stern States Water COW1cil believes it would be very important to t.hz solving of problems created by this procedure, to )~equest the Congress to also look a:mprehensively at the problems created by pre- vious procedures, and that they consider a le:Jislative remedy. 'rhe western state do not urrlerstarrl the timidity of the Task Force in ITBk:ing reccrorrerrlations to Congress, as the President's water policy reform has not expressed that kind of reservation on other issues with respect to taking initiatives and urging Congress to follow the p:llicies deemed appropriate ~ the Administrative branch. In fact, le:Jislation nBY be the very best solution to the problem. In this way, future administrations would be bourd =e effectively than by the executive order proposed by the Task Force. The Western States Water COW1cil believes that in the future, reservations should only be created by legislation and. not by excutive order. Further, all water rights reserved in the future should be precisely identified in the le:Jislation after very rreaningful consultation with the states involved. The Western State \Vater CoW1cil has, for a mnnber of years, v-urked on various legislative proposals inteIrled to -10- _. . _ n_ ____...____n._ . _._ _..~_. __"________n_.._..._____.____" ___..____ . ----