| OCR Text |
Show SOUTH CAROLINA 663 declared to be unlawful to pollute waters of the State, although, as indicated above, permits to discharge wastes may be issued. Abate- ment proceedings are provided for, but the statute admonishes that: * * * nothing herein contained shall abridge or alter rights of action in civil courts or remedies existing in equity or under the common law or statu- tory law nor shall any provision of this chapter * * * be construed as estop- ping * * * persons * * * as riparian owners or otherwise, in the exercise of their rights under the common law, statutory law or in equity to suppress nuisances or to abate pollution.8 The most interesting provision in the act is that causes of action arising from violations of the statute "inure to and are for the benefit of any person or persons damaged as a result of any such violation.9 This preserves "citizen suits" for anyone damaged by water pollu- tion, but in such suits a prior determination by the authority does not create a presumption that there has been a violation of the act. The citizen or private party must prove his case independently of such a determination. In connection with rights of riparians to sue for water pollution caused by other riparian owners, reference should be made to the case of United States v. 531.13 Acres of Land, dis- cussed in section 3.2, infra. B. OTHER PUBLIC WATER AGENCIES 10 South Carolina has authorized the creation of a number of special purpose districts. These include drainage districts,11 which may be established by landowners who wish to cooperate in an effort to drain and reclaim wet, swamp, and overflowed lands. Costs are paid from revenue received from a property tax and from a limited authority to sell bonds. These districts are also authorized to develop watershed projects. Apparently the law has been unsuccessful since no drainage districts existed in 1968 because of failure to collect sufficient assess- ments to maintain the ditches.12 Soil and water conservation districts have existed since 1937 and are generally organized on a countywide basis.13 Watershed conser- vation districts may also be organized by landowners for the purpose of developing watersheds within the district, having powers which include "developing and executing plans and programs relating to any phase of the control and prevention of soil erosion, flood preven- tion, or the conservation, development and utilization of soil and water resources, and the disposal of water.14 Although the districts have eminent domain powers, the present statute provides that con- demnation of an "existing public use shall be denied unless it can be shown that the specific property to be condemned is absolutely essen- , tial to the district, and the use to be condemned does not materially 8 Sec. 63-195.27 (1971 supp.). 8 Sec. 63-195.28 (1971 supp.). Some of these were filed as late as May 1971. 10 G. Dukes and J. Stepp, South Carolina Laws, Policies and Programs Pertaining to Water and Belated hand Resources (1968) contains a discussion of public water agencies in South Carolina by two agricultural economists. Numerous local entities discussed by the authors are not dealt with here. , ,, "Sees. 18-201 to 18-333 (1911 act) ; sees. 18-401 to 18-638 (1920 act), upheld as a proper governmental function in Billon Catfish Drainage Dist. v. Bank of Dillon, 143 S.C. 178, 141 S.B. 274 (1928). 13 G. Dukes and J. Stepp, note 10 above, at 22. "Sees. 63-5 to 63-167. "Sees. 63-171 to 63-191 (1971 supp.). |
