OCR Text |
Show 60 GROUND WATER can afford to pump. This is to say that only the higher valued uses could afford to pump the water from the greatest depths, and the ultimate phase of mining the reservoir will be limited to municipali- ties, industries, and others who realize a substantial economic benefit through use of the water. Needless to say, the hydrologic and economic determinations which must be made in connection with the lowering or stabilizing of ar- tesian pressures and ground water levels, and with respect to mining ground water basins, have a significant and practical effect upon water rights. If water levels are lowered below that point at which efficient users for lower valued uses can afford to pump, then they must forego their water use, and, in practical effect, lose their water rights without compensation-even though they might own the older (senior) rights in the basin. If appropriation law says anything in this regard, it simply says that water users who acquire rights in underground basins take such rights subject to the condition that later adjustments might have to be made in the means of diversion, which in this instance means the depth from which the water might have to be pumped. The water rights are thus, in effect, conditional rights which continue to exist only so long as the owner of the right operates efficiently and can afford to withdraw his water. At the point that he can no longer afford to do this he in effect is required to "abandon" the right. In such a situation, there really is no great benefit to the concept of priority in time of acquiring the right because, while the water might still be in the basin and available for use, it is of no value to the owner of the water right who no longer can afford to reach down far enough to get it. This is not to suggest that the owners of appropriation rights in underground basins are without any legal protection. Some States have either court decisions or statutes, or both, providing for some imprecisely defined measure of protection. The question of protec- tion is a mixed question of law and economic and administrative policy, and no satisfactory answer has been found by any State-al- though the experience in Orange County, Calif., seems to come the closest. If one were to forecast the future, it is likely that inefficient users fpr low valued uses (say irrigation) will be required to become effi- cient or to forego their water use; but that efficient users for low valued uses will be protected in the priority of their rights, and if an administrative decision is made to reduce the level of the reservoir below their economic pump limits, compensation will be required from subsequent higher valued uses that divest the prior rights. In riparian jurisdictions, water use from underground sources has not yet resulted in shortages that have precipitated much liti- gation. When and as it does, the disputes will be resolved by the rea- sonable use standards (or permit systems) in existence in the particular State. (3) CONJUNCTIVE MANAGEMENT Ground water basins cannot be managed effectively as isolated units, but must be integrated with management of surface water supplies. It has already been emphasized that ground water basins |