Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />., <br /> <br />grow, the public values change, western states have authority <br /> <br />to strictly require more efficient use in the public interest. <br /> <br />While the appropriation doctrine may sometimes appear to <br /> <br />be a disincentive for implementing conservation measures, it does <br /> <br /> <br />provide the necessary authority for states to mandate conservation <br /> <br />measures. How this authority is exercised in the future will <br /> <br /> <br />largely depend on evolving social and political standards. New <br /> <br />standards can rather easily be applied in considering new appro- <br /> <br />priation applications. A much more difficult issue is the <br /> <br /> <br />application of new efficiency criteria to existing uses represented <br /> <br />by valid vested water rights. <br /> <br />Public Trust Doctrine <br /> <br />The "public trust doctrine" is an evolving precept which <br />may affect future water use. In National Audubon Society v. Superior <br />Court of Alpine County, the California Supreme Court recently <br />decided that the public trust doctrine may be used to challenge <br />the diversion of water to meet vested water rights under an appro- <br />priate water rights system (at least in California). The court <br />determined that the State, as part of its sovereign power, has <br />a duty to insure that the public trust is continually fulfilled. <br />In the case of the City of Los Angeles and the Mono Lake Basin, <br />this means that the city will have to justify, in a judicial forum, <br />its diversion and use of water from Mono Lake. The Audubon Society <br />contested the exercise by Los Angeles of its vested water rights, <br />because of the effects of diversions in reducing the level of <br />Mono Lake. <br /> <br />')l;. <br />