Laserfiche WebLink
<br />02&5 lIdministratio.f Federal Water Rights · <br /> <br />12. The Western States Hater COW1cil sUppJrts the Task Force <br />decision that once fecJp...ral water rights are quantified and adjudicated <br />they should be subject to the administration of the state \'later right <br />systems. The \'iestern states can also support the b..u e..xceptions identi- <br />fied as (a) and (b) in the recarmeroation. /- <br />. - <br />. .. - - - -- <br /> <br />The western states do not, however, agree I"ith the third exception, <br />nor with the Justice Department I s recc:mrendation for deletion. The <br />notion that federal officials should be able to determine vlhether or not <br />there is ".. .manifest unfairness to the United States..." is absurd. In <br />essence, the policy ....'auld result in the federal government going its <br />separate way any time a prudent and equitable decision was mde by a <br />state administrator that fcund in favor of saueone that might be taking <br />a position opposed by the federal govermnent, or any time a state administrator <br />detennined that in equity the distribution of water required less than a <br />full allocation of water to federal claims and rights. In fact, the <br />idea is inconsis tent I"i th the tenor of the Supreme Court's decision in <br />U.S. v. California (New ~lelones). The United States should not be <br />allol"ed to follow state la\'l only when it is convenient, and unilaterally <br />avoid state law when it suits the federal purpose. <br /> <br />The western states further contest the Justice Department's reccmnendation <br />and conclusion that the entire idea should be dro;::>ped because the ~lcCarran <br />Amendm8nt does not grant jurisdiction over the United States for adminis- <br />tration of federal water rights. Although final decrees for distribution <br />of water must cane out of the :adjudicatory process, as the .Justice. Departmen+ <br />has stated, in the spirit of the President's announced cooperation with <br />the .states, the federal government should stand ready at all times to <br />help inco:rporate the reasonable nanagerrent of federal and non-federal <br />rights in a carmon state system. <br /> <br />G. Coordinating federal Expenditures Dependent Upon State Ivater <br />Rights <br /> <br />13. The Western States Water Council supports 'fask Force <br />reCCITIDEirrlenation 13. As with the expenditure of any funds from public <br />sources, -it is important that administrators invest them wisely. The <br />conflict with potential federal reserved \"ater rights has been a problem <br />for many decades with regard to toth the investment of state and federal <br />dollars as well as private dollars. The wise utilization of western <br />water resources has been extremely important to the econom,' of the l'iest, <br />and often the public interest is best served by a limited exercise of <br />federal reserved rights. There my be times in the future \'lhen federal <br />administrators will determine that only a limited exercise of a given <br />federal reserved water right is appropriate in view of the invest:Irent <br />the federal gove.rnrrent already has in prCx:Jrams and facilities dependent <br />upon the limited water resource upon which the federal claim could be <br />I1'ade . <br /> <br />-13- <br /> <br />---~'--'~-'" ~-,~---_. ~ -' <br />