OCR Text |
Show INTERSTATE1 WA.TER COMPACTS* By Clifford H« Stone/Director Colorado Water Conservation Board This article deals with interstate compacts. In the treatment of the subject the discussion is confined to compacts affecting interstate rivers which lie within, or the headwaters of which arise in, the arid and semi- arid West. The subject matter is- thus restricted because of the doctrine of appropriation recognized by state laws in the western part of the United States. The legal concept which controls the appropriation of water for beneficial use is peculiar to that area. Briefly, a compact may be described as an agreement among states with the sanction of the Congress as provided by the Constitution. Such an agreement when relating to water is founded on the premise that no one state* through the use of waters of an interstate river, may exercise control of a great natural resource which so profoundly affects the economic development in other states; and it is designed to meet common problems in a region, or group of states, the solution of which cannot be accomplished under a single state jurisdiction or without consideration of applicable federal jurisdic- tion. The economic and social development under a federal jurisdiction of- ten impinges upon the development under the state jurisdiction* The" desir- ability of preserving the integrity of state water laws* while at the same time giving due recognition to established and applicable principles of federal jurisdiction in the national interest* presents a problem in com- pact making of increasing importance to the states* ¦ The Supreme Court of the United States has saids "A river is more than an amenity, it is a treasure. It offers a necessity of life that must be rationed among those who have power over it•" (New Jersey v. New York, et al. , 2B3 . U* S» 336i at page 3I42), . The' people of the Vfest are becoming more aware of the import of this statement as large river basins reach ultimate development. The construc- tion and operation of multiple-use projects for irrigation, flood control, production of hydrdielectric energy, and maintenance of navigable capacity on lower reaches of rivers, have precipitated questions of mutual and diver- gent interests among states* Resort has been had to original suits in the United States Supreme Court for the determination of interstate water controversies, but exper- ience has demonstrated that the "judicial process is often too fixed to meet changing social and economic issues in a given region made up of a number of states. Such litigation leads to confusion, delays in development, and. large expenditures of public funds. And too often a judicial decree has proven to be unworkable and conducive to further litigation. Moreover, th_© judicial process cannot envision a future development program and provide by * Article in State Government, September, I9I+3• |