WSP05797 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

(ll) 2 0 ,H . . soum policy. nus is a policy noN in effect where the federal govenment has participated in state adjudications and has waived the right to assert any ad:l.itional or neN reserved rights. The difficulty with this policy as to the. effect on a subsequent administration as pointed out in the report, should be arrphasized. Indeed, the present administration will not be in office when the policy wuuld first be effectuated. A concern raised by the De:partm2nt of Justice as to whether a President can relinquish property rights of the United States, is also wurth of careful evaluation. An argurrent might reasonably prevail to the effect that if the right is not identified under the quantification of use process by the government, there is then, in fact, no further right to abandon or fail to assert. Further, the western states believe that national policy should be that the federal Executive should not assert any reserved rights to satisfy future needs, even for a reasonably "forseeable" perkO., based on any presently existing reserved rights. The '~estern States \~ater Council also believes there is a gocxl leqal argunent that a reserved right is not an openended right. D. creation of Reserved Rights in NeN Reservations .... 8. New federal water rights should, whenever possible, be established under state la\~~ The Task Force has identified that serious problEmS are created by the rrode in which federal reserved water rights have been created in the past. The \'i'estern States Water Co.mcil con=s with this conclusion. Therefore, it is very appropriate that a canprehensive look now be give.'1 to the way in II/hich reserved water rights can be created in the future. As is pointed out by the Task Force, this Administration cannot, even by formally instituted policy, sllch as an executive order, bind another administration. It would, however, be a step in the right direction for the Executive to issue an order whereby no future reserved water rights are to be established by the Execntive unless the right is precisely described in the order. A great I1Bjority of reserved water rights, however, have been created by interpretations of legislation by attorneys of the Executive branch and by the ,T\x:licial branch. The Western States Water Council believes it would be very important to the solving of problems created by this procedure, to request the Congress to also look canprehensively at the problems created by pre-- vious procedures, and that they consider a legislative remedy. The western state do not urx:1erstan::l the timidity of the Task Force in naking reccmnendations to Congress, as the President's water policy refoDn has not expressed that kind of reservation on other issues with respect to taking initiatives ani urging Congress to follow the policies deeood appropriate by the Administrative branch. In fact, leqislation may be the very best solution to the problem. In this way, future administrations would be lxJUro. IOC>re effectively than by the executive order proposed by the Task Force. The Western States Water Council believes that in the future, reservations should only be created by legislation ani. not by excutive order. Further, all water rights reserved in the future should be precisely identified in the leqislation after very rreaningful consultation with the states involved. The Western State \~ater Council has, for a nuntler of years, v.orked on various leqislative proposals interx1ed to -10- I \