Laserfiche WebLink
<br />O ~. - (' <br />Ul;)(il <br /> <br />- 4 - <br /> <br />34. <br /> <br />.) <br /> <br />In these circumstances, I would think it best to treat ground <br />water as a public resource (leaving the final ownership-control decis ion <br />to Congressional legislation and U. S. Supreme Court adjudication) and <br />establish state policies and n:e ans of implementation to conserve and <br />protect the resource for maximum and continued use (leaving guiding <br />principles open for court interpretation and management problems <br />open to limited local administration). I think there are sound scientific <br />ways to do this. <br /> <br />I could cite the laws of New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Florida, <br />Minnesota, Iowa, and other eastern states. But they don't provide much <br />proven experience that fits Colorado conditions and needs. This brings <br />the discussion back to the combined western experience and some new <br />ideas. <br /> <br />My ideas are not in published form, however, the following is a <br />summary of some of my ideas and suggestions. <br /> <br />1. The constitutional basis for state adjustment in rules of <br />(water) property and administration is well developed out <br />of the Oregon, Kansas, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming, and <br />Nebraska experience. The specific questions and analyses <br />are set out in the Michigan Law School report.'!) That <br />report substantiated what many water lawyers already knew <br />but it also am plified earlier conclusions. <br /> <br />2. The general water policies of California, Oregon, Washington, <br />and Nevada are com prehensive and progressive and have <br />been pretty well tested for surface waters. But they ha ve <br />only limited experience for ground waters. None, as yet, <br />fully recognizes the points set out below under No.4, but <br />the Oregon and Washington acts go part-way in this regard. <br /> <br />.' <br /> <br />3. Colorado law is so mixed up as to common law for ground <br />waters, statutory appropriation for surface waters, statu- <br />tory preference for surface water rights as ag ainst ground <br />water rights in tributary ground water sources, over- <br />appropriation of stream systems, interstate compacts, and <br />other matters, that I know of no model act that would fit <br />your varying conditions and needs. I, therefore, suggest <br />a study approach to develop an act to fit Colorado conditions <br />alone. <br /> <br />4/ Water Resources and the Law, Legislative Research Center, University <br />of Michigan, 1958. <br />