WSP01441

• File Number: 8407.500
• Description: Platte River Basin - River Basin General Publications - Missouri River
• State: CO
• Basin: South Platte
• Water Division: 1
• Date: 12/1/1971
• Author: Missouri Basin Inter
• Title: Missouri River Basin Comprehensive Framework Study-Volume VII-Plan of Development and Management-Appendix
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Report/Study

substantial portions of the seven other states have a
semi-arid or arid climate with limited and erratic
precipitation and corresponding limitations on the total
and seasonal availability of surface-water supplies. Thus,
the adoption of the appropriation doctrine in the states
with historically deficient water supplies resulted from
practical necessity, and water resources development in
these states would have been impossible, or at least
chaotic, without water laws based on this doctrine.
Of the seven states with water laws based on the
appropriation doctrine, six have established an agency of
the state to administer water rights. These agencies are
responsible for receiving and processing applications or
filings for new water rights and for policing the streams
to prevent violations of established water rights. In the
remaining state, Montana, surface water rights are
administered by the District Courts.
In six states of the Missouri Basin there may exist,
along with rights under State laws, many Indian water
rights read from the treaties and agreements between
Indian tribes and the United States which have been
approved by the Congress or formalized by Executive
Orders. It has been interpreted that Indian water rights
normally have a priority as of the date on which the
Indian reservation was established and maintain their
validity, even though unexercised. Such rights can be
quantified by fixing the amount of water needed to
serve the purposes for which the Indian Reservation was
established. Thus, if the purpose of the reservation was
to promote an agricultural economy, as generally has
been the case, the quantity of water reserved would be
the amount needed to serve practically the irrigable
acreage on the Indian Reservation. Use of Indian water
rights for non-irrigation purposes has not been judicially
questioned or ruled upon. Some MIssouri River Basill
States are not in agreement with the Indian water rights
position as outlined, and believe further legal clarifica-
tion of these rights is required. This matter is discussed
further in chapter 9.

Interstate Water Compacts and Court
Adjudications

The apportionment of the water resources of streams
which cross State boundaries is achieved by interstate
compacts subject to ratification by the Congress, or by
litigation seeking court adjudication to apportion the
water resources of the stream among the States involved.
With respect to the water resources of the Missouri River
Basin, the States of Colorado and Wyoming are each
parties to two interstate compacts with bordering states,
and each has had other interstate water resources
apportioned by litigation and court adjudication. The
State of Nebraska is party to three interstate compacts
and one settlement by court adjudication. The States of
Kansas, Montana, and North and South Dakota are

38

parties to one interstate compact each with various
bordering states. A compact on the Big Blue River is
under negotiation by Nebraska and Kansas and one
other compact involving Nebraska and South Dakota
awaits congressional ratification. All of the existing
interstate compacts and court adjudicated apportion-
ments concern allocations for direct diversion or storage
of surface waters. Table 9 summarizes the existing and
pending interstate compacts and court adjudications in
the basin.

FEDERAL LEGISLATION

Over the years, numerous laws have been enacted by
the Congress which affect water and related land
resources. These are enumerated in the appendix, "Laws,
Policies, and Administration Related to Water Resources
Development." This legislation has resulted in Federal
involvement in the water resources field ranging from
data collection and research to planning, construction,
and management of projects and programs. The under-
lying basis of Federal legislation and investments has
been to promote the national interest by participation in
the development and management of natural resources;
to foster economic stability by assistance in prevention
and mitigation of natural disasters; and to encourage and
assist in solutions of problems relating to water and land
resources which involve the national interest by reason
of their widespread scope and serious impacts on the
health and welfare of the people.
Within the overall scope of the history of basin
development, three aspects of Federal legislation merit
specific mention, because of their particular significance
to the water and land resource problems of the basin.
These are: (i) The Reclamation Act of 1902; (2) The
Flood Control Act of 1936; and (3) The Soil Conser-
vation Act of 1935 and the Watershed Protection and
Flood Prevention Act of 1954.
The Reclamation Act of 1902 authorized the Secre-
tary of the Interior to build water diversion and
impoundment facilities to provide irrigation water for
public and private lands in the 17 states west of the 98th
Meridian. The fundamental purpose of the act was to
reclaim and foster settlement on undeveloped lands of
the Western States, with limita tions on the size of
individually owned acreage furnished irrigation water.
The Reclamation Act has since been amended and
expanded to permit water resources development for
other beneficial purposes.
The Flood Control Act of 1936 established the policy
that flood control was in the national interest, and
provided the basis for initiating a program for control of
the periodic devastation of the basin caused by wide-
spread floods. Subsequent flood control acts amended
the 1936 Act to authorize Federal participation in more
comprehensive water resources development.