| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="FirstPaper" |
|---|
| |
>
> | anyone out there? i made a lot of changes to this paper after Eben's comments, and i would love some feedback. if you're reading this...please make edits/comments! - Nate | | | _
Prior Appropriation in an Uncertain West | | | Water rights in the western states developed to meet the needs of the frontier. Instead of employing traditional riparian rights, most western states adopted the doctrine of prior appropriation, which encouraged mining, farming and small urban development. The doctrine has subsequently evolved from the rigid formality of “first in time is first in line” to a background system of infrequently enforced rules recognizing special rights for cities, mining and fishing. Furthermore, federal environmental laws subjugate state water rights, partially displacing the prior appropriation claims founded upon them. The current system thus features a patchwork of competing interests of varying sizes who claim rights under a convoluted system of common law, federal regulation, and state statutes.
Impending Scarcity | |
<
< | In 1900, the population of the eleven continental western states was about 4 million, but by 2000 it had grown to over 64 million, and will undoubtedly continue to increase. Due to the expected effects of climate change, however, scientists predict that water levels will shrink by [[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/28/science/earth/28climate.html?_r=4&oref=slogin
][at least 20%]]. Water sources will also change substantially, as mountain runoff, the traditional source of water, decreases and rains increase. Furthermore, tree ring studies have shown that the region has suffered long droughts that have had cataclysmic effects on the inhabitants, suggesting that water levels are unpredictable. Thus, the West is entering the 21st century in a precarious position: an exploding population lives in an environment with decreasing water levels that is prone to devastating droughts. | >
> | In 1900, the population of the eleven continental western states was about 4 million, but by 2000 it had grown to over 64 million, and will undoubtedly continue to increase. Due to the expected effects of climate change, however, scientists predict that water levels will shrink by at least 20%. Water sources will also change substantially, as mountain runoff, the traditional source of water, decreases and rains increase. Furthermore, tree ring studies have shown that the region has suffered long droughts that have had cataclysmic effects on the inhabitants, suggesting that water levels are unpredictable. Thus, the West is entering the 21st century in a precarious position: an exploding population lives in an environment with decreasing water levels that is prone to devastating droughts. | | | Possible Solutions | | | Government control | |
<
< | A few states have begun to purchase water rights from private holders and then lease the rights back to the original owners. This policy creates state control without changing water usage in the short term, and is a step in the right direction that should be emulated by the other western states. By centralizing ownership within state governments, the region would have an opportunity to create a long term plan that is responsive to current water needs, but balances future requirements against expected decreases in supply. Instead of allowing unpredictable market forces to determine the allocation of the resource, water managers could ensure that it serves the immediate needs of the population and of necessary industry. To effectuate such a policy, states could rely upon takings and eminent domain to secure water rights from unwilling owners. | >
> | A few states have begun to purchase water rights from private holders and then lease the rights back to the original owners. This policy creates state control without changing water usage in the short term, and is a step in the right direction that should be emulated by the other western states. By centralizing ownership within state governments, the region would have an opportunity to create a long term plan that is responsive to current water needs, but balances future requirements against expected decreases in supply. Instead of allowing unpredictable market forces to determine the allocation of the resource, water managers could ensure that it serves the immediate needs of the population and of necessary industry. To effectuate such a policy, states could rely upon takings to secure water rights from unwilling owners. | | | Finally, states could use the public trust doctrine to inhibit users from drawing excessive amounts of water from certain sources. The public trust has been criticized because courts have failed to provide sufficient justification for applying it (cite-paper 15), but the expected decrease of water could provide such a justification. While this could be an effective strategy for limiting use in specific cases, it requires extensive litigation on a case by case basis, and would not be an adequate policy by itself. |
|