OCR Text |
Show ORGANIZATION 23 Similar circumstances arise when change applications are filed and when water use transfers are proposed, and in each instance the administrative officer must make a preliminary resolution of the conflicts which arise from the protests filed. Of course, those admin- istrative determinations are not adjudications of the validity of water rights, since parties aggrieved by the administrative decision can always appeal to the courts for a judicial determination and for a reversal of the administrative decision. But, unless such an appeal is taken, the administrative decision becomes final; although many such decisions are subject to the continuing jurisdiction of the administrative officer and may subsequently be modified by him if it appears that established water rights are being harmed by new appropriations or water use transfers. (2) EASTERN PERMIT SYSTEMS Permits issued in Eastern States ordinarily do not have the stabil- ity and permanence of western appropriation rights, and there is seldom any priority based upon the date when the- permit was issued. As a result, all of the permits have an equal priority, except for special conditions or limitations which may be imposed on any par- ticular permit when it is issued by the administrative agency. Furthermore, since the permits are usually for limited terms, and are frequently revocable by the administrative agency when the public interest requires revocation, many disputes between permit holders are resolved administratively through the imposition of new or addi- tional limitations on water use under the permit or by revocation of the permit. While aggrieved permit holders may appeal to the courts from such administrative decisions, very few have done so, and the obvious reason is that the administrative agency has acted within statutory authority which allowed the administrative action that was taken. The only substantive basis for judicial review would be the con- stitutionality of the legislation, and there is little question concerning constitutionality because the permits are in fact issued under the authority of the very legislation which would be under attack; and if such legislation were stricken, there would be no authority for issu- ance of the permit in the first place. With respect to traditional riparian rights, there is no mechanism for administrative resolution of conflicts between riparian contestants. Even where the dispute is between a permit holder and a riparian owner, the matter cannot be resolved administratively, because ad- ministrative agencies cannot adjudicate private riparian rights. How- ever, in those States where riparian rights are converted into permit rights, and ultimately assume (or are reduced to) a legal status equal to other permits, administrative agencies can resolve disputes in the same manner as between contestants whose initial rights derived from permits. d. Judicial Resolution of Conflicts _ By and large, the courts have been the exclusive forum for resolving riparian water use conflicts. The principal reason is because private riparian rights are measured and determined only between the par- |