|
<br />002556
<br />
<br />Pacific Southwest was estimated at $83 billion, with
<br />the regional figures being $72 billion for California,
<br />$4 billion for the Great Basin, $6 billion for the
<br />Lower Colorado Region, and $1 billion for Upper
<br />Colorado.
<br />
<br />Legal and Institutional Environments
<br />
<br />The Pacific Southwest is mostly arid and the legal
<br />and institutional system is organized for use and
<br />control of water. The use of water is subject to the
<br />laws of the individual States. Interstate compacts and
<br />agreements apportion the water of interstate streams
<br />among the States. A treaty betwcen the United States
<br />and Mexico apportions the flow of the Colorado and
<br />Tijuana Rivers. Legal control of navigable streams is
<br />vested in the Federal Government under the "com-
<br />merce clause" of the Constitution. (Article I, Section
<br />8.)
<br />A water right is very valuable in the Pacific
<br />Southwest. Water rights are generally based on
<br />beneficial use of the water and on the appropriation
<br />doctrine in which first-in-time is first-in-right, al-
<br />though California also applies the riparian doctrine.
<br />The water right is sometimes identified with a
<br />particular piece of land, although there is variation
<br />among the States. Most of the readily available
<br />surface water, and even most of that which can be
<br />developed only with difficulty, has been assigned to
<br />specific applicants or users. The remaining supply is
<br />usually desired and actively pursued by numerous
<br />State and interstate groups.
<br />Because of the complex nature of water developw
<br />ment projects, cooperation among water users is
<br />usually essential to make the projects possible.
<br />Cooperation has been obtained by agreement, by
<br />formation of water-user groups, by court action, or
<br />by legislation. One State, California, has adopted the
<br />"pooling" concept in its State Water Project. The
<br />California State water agency's contracts provide for
<br />delivering specific quantities of water of acceptable
<br />quality at specific points, but do not specify area of
<br />origin of the wa ter.
<br />The Federal Government has asserted, and the
<br />courts have affirmed, that it has a right to sufficient
<br />water to develop Federal "reserved" land for the
<br />purpose of the reservations. The right is effective as
<br />of the date of the reservation action. Because this has
<br />had an unsettling effect on States' water rights, it has
<br />
<br />Description
<br />
<br />
<br />been the subject of numerous legislative proposals in
<br />the United States Congress. This controversy has not
<br />been settled.
<br />Water rights law as it has evolved in the Pacific
<br />Southwest over the past century is not compatible
<br />with many instream uses of water. There is a lack of
<br />legal protection for the water supply to meet many
<br />instream beneficial uses, such as fish and wildlife,
<br />recreation, and water quality maintenance. Other
<br />conflicts arise because water rights do not guarantee
<br />quality of water. Increasing competition for the
<br />remaining water resources intensifies these conflicts.
<br />Major streams affected by present or proposed
<br />interstate compacts include the Bear, Klamath,
<br />Colorado, Truckee, Carson, and Walker Rivers. The
<br />status of these compacts, related legislation, and
<br />Supreme Court actions are as follows:
<br />Bear River Compact - (Utah, Idaho, Wyoming).
<br />Final congressional approval March 17, 1958.
<br />Colorado River Compact - (Colorado, Wyoming,
<br />New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Arizona, California).
<br />Approved by Congress in the Boulder Canyon Project
<br />Act of December 21, 1928, and declared to be in
<br />effect by President Hoover on June 25, 1929, after
<br />California adopted California Limitation Act.
<br />Upper Colorado River Compact - (Colorado,
<br />Wyoming, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona). Approved by
<br />Congress by Act of April 6, 1949.
<br />Klamath River Basin Compact - (California,
<br />Oregon). Final congressional approval August 30,
<br />1957.
<br />CalifofniawNevada Interstate Compact
<br />(California, Nevada). Ratified by California and
<br />Nevada, but not yet approved by the U.S. Congress.
<br />Decree of the U.S. Supreme Court, Arizona v.
<br />California, March 9, 1964.
<br />Colorado River Basin Project Act, P.L. 90-537,
<br />September 30,1968.
<br />Private organizations, local and State governments,
<br />and many Federal agencies, alone or in cooperative
<br />efforts, are institutionally organized to carry out
<br />water and related land development, protection, and
<br />management. In addition to the Federal programs
<br />available to the Nation as a whole, the Pacific
<br />Southwest is a beneficiary of certain Federal pro-
<br />grams specifically developed to meet western needs.
<br />The most prominent of these in the water develop-
<br />ment field are Federal reclamation laws and project
<br />acts applicable only to the 17 western States.
<br />
<br />15
<br />
|