OCR Text |
Show 308 APPROPRIATION OF WATER reorganization and hence have remained unchanged throughout the water administration histories of their respective States. Wyoming's original water administration organization has persisted to the present time-a Board of Control, comprising the State Engineer as president and the four water commissisioners. Utah likewise has had but one water administrative agency-the State Engineer. In Colorado, the only change in designation was an early one in name only-from State Hydraulic Engineer to State Engineer. In most of the other States, however, several changes have taken place. This is exemplified in Nebraska-adjacent to both Colorado and Wyoming, both of which are noteworthy in that they have continued their organizations unchanged over more than seven decades. In Nebraska, the water administra- tive agency was first concerned solely with irrigation, later with other State functions as well, and finally with water resources only. Another contrasting State is California, which entered the water administration field comparatively late with a State Water Commission. The commission was subsequently included as a division in a department of public works, the water resource functions of which were later, by specific direction of the legislature, administered and exercised through the State Engineer. Currently, these California functions are divided between two independent State agencies-a five-member Water Resources Control Board, and a major department in the State Government vested with large powers in the field of water resource protection and development. Changes in water administration organizations have resulted from various causes. Some are changes in name only. Of course, some changes stem from the frequently evidenced impulse to reorganize State agencies in order to meet changing and developing public needs. This is not a difficult legislative process where the demands are strong enough. In Wyoming, where legislation creating the water agencies is imbedded in the State constitution, it would be consider- ably more difficult, but not impossible if the need were to arise. Cutbacks in several jurisdictions resulted from lack of necessity for large organizations. Thus in both Dakotas, the originally elaborate water distribution organiza- tions proved unnecessary and were abolished. Experience with the Oregon Board of Control led to successive elimination of the two superintendent members and transfer of their duties to the remaining member, the State Engineer. Yet the development of Oregon's water economy has since resulted in requiring approval of the State Water Resources Board in case of issuance of certain permits of certain types prior to action thereon by the State Engineer, at the same time vesting the duties of the Hydroelectric Commission in the State Engineer. New Mexico for a time had a Board of Water Commissioners, the function of which was to hear and decide appeals from the State Engineer's acts and decisions, subject to appeal therefrom to the courts. This was finally abolished as an unnecessary link in the chain of appeal from the State Engineer-the highest administrative official-to the courts. |