WSP02891 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I' ~\ ~. '-< 7 CI to U u lJ . " Comments and Recommendations of the Natural Resources Commission INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The responsibility of the Natural Resources Commission in preparing policy issue study reports is twofold. First, the Commission is re- sponsible for presenting policy alternatives which are both representative in scope and ob- jective in substance. It is hoped that this report accomplishes that purpose. Second, the Com- mission is responsible for providing its opinion and recommendations on the various alterna- tives presented in each report to the general public, the Legislature, and the Governor. The Commission arrives at its recommenda- tions following a review of the report and con- sideration of comments generated from public hearings and from the Public Advisory Board. Comments and recommendations are offered in this section on each of twelve alternatives identi- fied in this report. Some alternatives are recom- mended in whole, some in part with qualifica- tions, and others are not recommended. RECOMMENDED ALTERNATIVES Alfer(lative #2: Authorize and initiate the ne- gotiation and formation of interstate agree- ments or compacts on interstate streams on which no compacts currentiy exist. The Commission perceives the problems fac- ing interstate water use of the Missouri River to be more urgent than either the Lower Niobrara River and Ponca Creek or the White River. It is likely that increasing demands on water for satis- fying Indian and federal water rights claims and for energy development, among others, will raise the potential for interstate conflict among states in the Missouri River Basin. Therefore, the Commission recommends pur- suing an interstate agreement or compact with respect to the Missouri River. The Commission also supports present efforts which are being made in this direction. A specific agreement on an isolated issue of concern to basin states is also possible. For example, an agreement could be negotiated on whether or not indvidual basin states could unilaterally sell water out of the Missouri River. However, it should be noted that all agreements and compacts between states require the consent of Congress. Alternative #4: Declare that natural flow per- mits may be issued for other beneficial uses including instream uses. The Commission recommends adoption of this alternative only insofar as it does not conflict with our recommendation on the Policy Issue Study on tnstream Flows. We believe that it would benefit the State of Nebraska to recognize in- stream uses, to a certain degree, as legally valid and important uses in certain stream reaches in the state. In our view, the fact that courts may consider the amount of water allocated to legal uses as a factor when making an interstate allocation further justifies our consideration of this alternative. Consequently, we again recommend that natural resources districts be authorized to de- signate protected stream reaches in Nebraska which possess especially beneficial instream values. We would further emphasize that stored water can be used to contribute to the mainten- ance of instream flows. Alfernalive #6: Strengthen the interstate groundwater transfer statute. The decision of the United States Supreme Court in Douglas v. Sporhase placed some limita- tions on the ability of states to categorically restrict the interstate transport of water beyond their borders. Even though the reciprocity clause in Nebraska's statute was declared unconstitu- tional, the conservation and preservation as- pects of the law were recognized as legitimate and important goals of groundwater regulation. For this reason, the Commission recommends strengthening Nebraska's policy on ground- water conservation and preservation. Ne- braska's interstate groundwater transfer statute could be strengthened by enacting stronger groundwater statutes which could have an im- pact on it. We agree that the types of statutory