Water Rights: Oversight Hearings Before the Subcommittee on Water and Power Resources of the Committee on Resources, House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, First Session, on Examining the Problems that States are Facing in Water Supply, October 4, 1995--Hermiston, OR, October 5, 1995--Boise, ID.

Front Cover

From inside the book

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

Other editions - View all

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 305 - The moment the idea is admitted into society, that property is not as sacred as the laws of God, and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence.
Page 175 - The reclamation and settlement of the arid lands will enrich every portion of our country, just as the settlement of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys brought prosperity to the Atlantic States.
Page 73 - State courts for the adjudication of water rights (tiG Stat. 560) Consent is given to join the United States as a defendant in any suit (1) for the adjudication of rights to the use of water of a river system or other source, or (2) for the administration of such rights, where it appears that the United States is the owner of or is in the process of acquiring water rights by appropriation under State law, by purchase, by exchange, or otherwise, and the United States is a necessary party to such suit.
Page 74 - ... suit. The United States, when a party to any such suit, shall (1) be deemed to have waived any right to plead that the state laws are inapplicable or that the United States is not amenable thereto by reason of its sovereignty...
Page 272 - Although this power of changing the common-law rule as to streams within its dominion undoubtedly belongs in each State, yet two limitations must be recognized: First, that, in the absence of specific authority from Congress, a State cannot, by its legislation, destroy the right of the United States, as the owner of lands bordering on a stream, to the continued flow of its waters, so far, at least, as may be necessary for the beneficial uses of the government property...
Page 273 - This Court has long held that when the Federal Government withdraws its land from the public domain and reserves it for a federal purpose, the Government, by implication, reserves appurtenant water then unappropriated to the extent needed to accomplish the purpose of the reservation.
Page 74 - (b) Summons or other process in any such suit shall be served upon the Attorney General or his designated representative. "(c) Nothing in this Act shall be construed as authorizing the joinder of the United States in any suit or controversy in the Supreme Court of the United States involving the right of States to the use of the water of any interstate stream.
Page 272 - State cannot by its legislation destroy the right of the United States, as the owner of lands bordering on a stream to the continued flow of its waters ; so far at least as may be necessary for the beneficial uses of the government property. "Second, that it is limited by the superior power of the General Government to secure the uninterrupted navigability of all navigable streams within the limits of the United States.
Page 280 - Chairman, and members of the subcommittee. It is an honor and a pleasure to make my first appearance before this subcommittee.
Page 272 - In determining whether there is a federally reserved water right implicit in a federal reservation of public land, the issue is whether the Government intended to reserve unappropriated and thus available water. Intent is inferred if the previously unappropriated waters are necessary to accomplish the purposes for which the reservation was created.

Bibliographic information