|
<br />f'Z"
<br />q~:?J
<br />
<br />o [J 2f:;'-:.'~~
<br />
<br />^',"'~"
<br />~
<br />',w
<br />
<br />',-" '- ,', 'i-~ ""I
<br />'I
<br />,~
<br />
<br />."""
<br />' "
<br />,,:
<br />
<br />STATE ORGANIZATIONS AND ACTIVITIES IN WATER RESOURCE
<br />
<br />,,'y 9 <) 10"8'
<br />., ., '-' '.J ,..:J..;
<br />cc;_:=~ ~L:..l [R
<br />PROG,,^un G()r\~~X,.,[, '!'.i ,,,,,,.,,
<br />.t'\tU"W ~ -, ~-;'.''''niM
<br />
<br />Introduction
<br />
<br />~~
<br />
<br />The recent developments that have focussed attention on the
<br />water resource needs of the nation have caused increased interest in
<br />the administration of our water resource programs. The division of
<br />responsibilities for water resource programs among federal, state and
<br />local governments also has received more attention of late. Prior to
<br />the postwar period, a pattern had developed in the administration of
<br />water resources which put primary emphasis on the one hand on federal
<br />programs of flood control, navigation (rivers and harbors), irrigation,
<br />power generation, and, on the other hand, on local programs including
<br />water supply and sewage disposal programs of localities'and the drainage,
<br />levee, 'irrigation and other water programs of special districts. Little
<br />attention was given to state programs which, with several notable excep-
<br />tions, were concerned primarily with regulatory programs and some research
<br />activities, largely at the universities. State water agencies tended to
<br />be small supervisory departments.
<br />
<br />Now there is evidence that a change is taking place in program
<br />emphasis as a result of increasing demands for water and changing water
<br />use patterns. Programs to insure the adequacy and dependability of
<br />water supplies for domestic and industrial uses are assuming greater
<br />relative importance. These activities are exercised traditionally by
<br />local governments, with state governments involved to varying degrees.
<br />Also of growing significance is the use of supplemental irrigation by
<br />'agriculture in the Midwest, South and East. Here again, there is a
<br />question whether local governments, including special districts, can
<br />meet all of these new demands without additional state help and more
<br />active state programs.
<br />
<br />In two areas of traditional state action, increased demands are
<br />being placed directly on state government agencies. Mounting demands
<br />for water, coupled with increased sources of pollution, have focused at-
<br />tention on the need for better pollution control programs. Since the
<br />level of purity of water partially determines the use to which it can be
<br />put, total effective supply can be increased by maintaining high levels
<br />of water quality through effective pollution control programs. However,
<br />the urbanization of a growing population in the country and the expanded
<br />industrial use of water have produced concentrations of water polluting
<br />wastes and intensified the pollution control problems.
<br />
<br />The competing demands of domestic, municipal, industrial, agri-
<br />cultural and recreational uses of water in periods of actual or foreseeable
<br />shortages have put strains on existing procedures for the allocation of
<br />available water resources. As the types of demand for water in a given
<br />area Shift, the need for flexibility and adaptability in allocations be-
<br />come apparent. Limitations in both the riparian doctrine of water rights
<br />and the appropriation doctrine have brought proposals for modifications
<br />to meet new circumstances. The increasing use of ground water (for
<br />example, as a source of municipal and industrial supply and for irriga-
<br />tion) also has served to emphasize the need for further attention to be
<br />
|