Premium
WATER AND WATER RIGHTS TRANSFERS: A NEW POLICY FOR NEBRASKA 1
Author(s) -
Gilliland Martha W.,
Wallin Gerald P.,
Smaus Ronald
Publication year - 1989
Publication title -
jawra journal of the american water resources association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.957
H-Index - 105
eISSN - 1752-1688
pISSN - 1093-474X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1989.tb05665.x
Subject(s) - legislature , supreme court , water quality , government (linguistics) , groundwater , water resources , surface water , principal (computer security) , business , state (computer science) , process (computing) , environmental planning , environmental science , law , political science , environmental engineering , engineering , computer science , ecology , linguistics , philosophy , geotechnical engineering , biology , operating system , algorithm
Nebraska has abundant supplies of high quality surface and ground water. The U.S. Supreme Court decision in 1982, declaring ground water to be an article of commerce, is widely perceived as giving neighboring states easier access to Nebraska water. Some neighboring states, particularly Colorado and Wyoming, are in water short situations. Additionally, current legal restrictions on certain types of transfers within the State could be inhibiting the “highest and best use” of Nebraska's water. Thus, in 1987 the Nebraska Legislature called for the development of a new water policy for Nebraska that would promote the economically efficient use of water, yet protect the environment as well as the rights of individuals (for example, third parties) and the public. Through an interagency study employing an extensive public involvement process, a policy to be recommended to the Legislature in 1989 emerged. The policy revises the basic definition of water rights and transfers and eliminates most of the inconsistencies in the water allocation system by treating most types of water resources, most types of water users, and most locations of use similarly in the permitting process. (The principal exception is the individual irrigator using ground water on the overlying land where overlying land is one government surveyed section; such use is not defined to be a transfer nor is a permit required.) An impact assessment would be required of most new water uses except on site uses of ground water. Compensation measures could be specified as a condition of the permit where appropriate. The permit would be issued only if the benefits of the proposed transfer clearly outweigh adverse effects that could not be avoided or effectively compensated. The policy allows for the sale or lease of “salvaged” water. It calls for the State to facilitate transfers by acting as a clearinghouse for potential buyers and sellers, and it allows the State to sponsor water projects. An annual fee to be paid by many water users, in order to provide a fund for compensation and for state sponsored water projects, was proposed. However, it met with extensive opposition. Thus, the policy recommends only that the Legislature examine potential funding programs and equitable user fees.