Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />,:;) <br />:) <br />... <br />~ <br />~ <br />o <br /> <br />Regarding Feo.eral juriso.iction over water rights, the States held <br />strong opinions: They felt that the Federal government already has <br />some water rights and it should stay out of the rest; that interstate <br />water issues should be solved by interstate compacts. But if the Federal <br />government enters the issue, a specific adjudicative body should be <br />designated as coordinator, and the criteria to o.etermine where and to <br />whom the water goes should be based on optimum use. Economic ano. <br />environmental goals of the States could be hindered by an uncertain or <br />detrimental Federal stance. In short, the energy crisis should not be <br />used as a back door to obtain water, rights. <br /> <br />On the question of reallocation, the following views were express eo.: <br />Since existing allocation is already committed, ~ sources of water <br />should be developed; reallocation should be considereo. only if all <br />interested parties can participate in o.iscussions. <br /> <br />#5. Please cite spe.cific laws (short title only) in your State wbichwoulo. <br />be impediments to energy development ano./or the provision of water <br />for energy development. <br /> <br />Denver: (Compiled ano. Sumrn.ariz,ed in Dpn:ver by Jack Pepper, State ' <br />Water Engineer, Mississippi Board of Water Commissioners) <br /> <br />Almost all States listed water rights acts and water quality control, <br />acts that would require compliance. Va'rious States addeo. scenic river, <br />power plant siting, flooo. plain management, strip mining laws, etc. <br />Some States mentioned specific purpose laws. In summary, it was <br />pointed out that regulatory laws may help and not hinder the best use of <br />water and that energy developments should proceed only under strict and <br />rigidly enforced controls. Under State laws, water rights can be <br />acquired by negotiated purchase or by condemnation, and most State laws <br />are well adapted to provide water for energy self-sufficiency. <br /> <br />Atlanta: Compiled ano. Summarized in Atlanta by William Mattox, <br />Assistant Deputy' Director, Ohio Department of Natural Resources) <br /> <br />On the request to list specific laws impeding energy development or <br />the provision of water therefore, the response was varied. Seven States <br />list€lo. laws dealing with matters from scenic rivers to States I rights and <br />listed the laws by short title or common law reference. Six States <br />mentioned general laws; two States expressed reservations about the <br />wording of the question by requesting a more clear cut definition of <br />"impeo.iments" and by indicating that the laws are necessities rather than <br />imp<;>diments. There was recogtlition that the States had control over <br />water rights through existing laws. Many States referred in general to <br />riparian ano. other rights. <br /> <br />l4 <br />