Laserfiche WebLink
<br />'. <br /> <br />in relation to the general benefits expected from the diversion. <br /> <br /> <br />Presumably, mitigation of unacceptable impacts can be required <br /> <br /> <br />before a permit will be issued. If no artificial reservations of <br /> <br /> <br />water are included, flexibility is retained in the system. <br /> <br />C. Compensation <br />The third general approach taken to address area of origin <br />concerns emphasizes compensation. Rather than reserving water, <br /> <br /> <br />the intent is to make the area of origin better off through <br /> <br /> <br />provision of benefits that at least offset the costs imposed by <br /> <br /> <br />the diversion. California took this approach in developing its <br /> <br /> <br />State Water project. The Burns-Porter Act, passed in 1959 to <br /> <br /> <br />create funding for the project, contained several provisions <br /> <br /> <br />intended to compensate northern California for the loss of <br /> <br /> <br />water. One form of compensation was funding for local needs <br /> <br /> <br />including flood contro1.43 In addition, the Act established a <br /> <br /> <br />grants program for recreation and fish enhancement and a loans <br /> <br /> <br />program for small projects and rehabilitation of domestic water <br /> <br /> <br />systems.44 It should be noted, however, that this law retained <br /> <br /> <br />the permanent priority status to exported water for residents of <br /> <br /> <br />the areas of origin discussed previously.45 <br /> <br /> <br />The 1968 Colorado River Basin project Act adopted a compen- <br /> <br /> <br />sation approach to address area of origin concerns. Section <br /> <br />43Cal. Water Code 812938 (West 1971). <br /> <br /> <br />44Cal. Water Code 8812934 (d) (6), 12880-12893 (West 1971). <br /> <br /> <br />45See text accompanying notes 20-22 supra. <br /> <br /> <br />18 <br />