OCR Text |
Show 20 ORGANIZATION cedures and institutional arrangements that are rather different from those employed to create private rights in water use. It is difficult to categorize the various ways in which such public social values in water are protected, but a few basic approaches may be noted. Some States have enacted wild and scenic rivers legisla- tion, thereby preserving certain streams by direct legislative action. Other States have enacted legislation authorizing the State wildlife agency to file applications with, and obtain permits from, the State water agency to preserve minimum stream flows for fishery re- sources. Others have authorized administrative agencies to with- draw from appropriation or use sufficient water to sustain minimum stream flows which will protect water quality, public health, fishery resources, and scenic and environmental values. Still others have directed State administrative officers in the West to protect recrea- tional, wildlife, and environmental values when acting upon appli- cations to appropriate water; and similar legislative directives apply to many agencies which administer permit systems in the Eastern States. And a number of States require that permits be Obtained from administrative agencies before any action is taken to alter or relocate streambeds, or before excavating, dredging, or fill- ing in stream channels. 2.2 Resolution of Water Use Conflicts a. Statutory Adjudication in the West (1) DEVELOPMENT AND PURPOSE It has already been noted that the increasing economic develop- ment of the West, with increasing demands for water use, produced a corresponding need to define and settle individual water rights among users of a common water supply. The difficulties arising from poor records (or no records at all), repeated water rights liti- gation between individual users, lack of administrative machinery, and the failure to integrate the various claims and rights, have also been mentioned. Some of the early court decrees were useful for ad- ministrative purposes when they defined water uses; but, more often than not, they were deficient in that they did not fully define all of the pertinent facts of the use. That is, the court might have determined which of the competing parties had the prior right and, perhaps, what quantity or percentage of the water a party was en- titled to divert from the stream, but in most cases no determination was made concerning the place of use, the period of use, and other elements necessary to describe adequately the water right. Statutory adjudication procedures were adopted to cure these ills. (2) NATURE AND SCOPE The "general adjudication" or "general determination," as it is commonly known in the West, is a statutory procedure whereby water users or State officials can initiate judicial proceedings to obtain a determination of the respective water rights of all water users on a particular river or other water source. Due to the |