COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA, Hon. THOMAS H. KUCHEL, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR TOM: California counties are aware that the Congress is currently considering S. 1111 and S. 1275. Both are tremendously important bills in the water future of California. We know that you are much interested in the position of California's 58 counties with respect to these two bills. I am happy to transmit herewith the unanimous action of our 53d annual meeting in Sacramento this month. In it we pledge all-out support for S. 1275 and conditional support for S. 1111, if this latter bill is amended to include local government representation on the river basins commissions. We stand ready to help you in any way in the furtherance of action on this proposed legislation. Cordially yours, WM. R. MACDOUGALL, General Counsel and Manager. RESOLUTION OF THE COUNTY SUPERVISORS ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA Whereas two bills have been introduced for consideration by the 88th Congress; namely, 1. S. 1111; cited as the Water Resources Planning Act of 1961, which bill, if enacted, would establish a Water Resources Council composed of the Secretaries of the Interior, Agriculture, the Army, and Health, Welfare, and Education, and river basins commissions, composed of certain Federal officials and officers, one member from each State which lies wholly or partially within a region river basin or group of river basins and certain other persons; said Council and commissions to coordinate and allocate funds in connection with broad river basin planning by Federal, State, and local interests; 2. S. 1275; a bill attempting to clarify relationship of interests of the United States and of the States in the use of the waters of certain streams, providing for recognition by the United States of "water laws" in the State, or States in which diversion, storage, distribution, or consumptive use of water is contemplated by the Federal Government, and also provides for compensation by the United States for water taken by or under the authority of the State, or States; and Whereas the County Supervisors Association of California wholeheartedly supports water resource development on a broad basin basis providing the development is realized in accordance with planning decisions agreed upon by Federal, State, and local interests and within the appropriate laws of the State of California; and Whereas S. 1111 does not provide for local governmental representation on river basins commissions: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the County Supervisors Association of California goes on record in support of S. 1275 and S. 1111, if S. 1111 is amended to include local government representation on said commissions; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded to the Governor of the State of Californa, all congressional representatives of the State of California, and appropriate State and Federal legislative and congressional committees, the California Water Commission, and the department of water resources. I certify this to be a resolution adopted by the County Supervisors Association of California in annual meeting at Sacramento, Calif., on October 11, 1963. [Seal] WM. R. MACDOUGALL, General Counsel and Manager. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES On motion of Supervisor Chace for Supervisor Dorn, unanimously carried, it is ordered that following resolution be and it is hereby adopted: Whereas the longstanding and unsolved jurisdictional dispute between the Federal Government and the 17 western irrigation States over the unappropriated waters lying in the rivers and streams of California and other States in the West demands clarification; and Whereas during the past decade several efforts have been made to secure affirmative action by the Congress of the United States to clarify the relationship of interests of the United States and of the States in the use of waters of certain streams, but, up to the present time, no bill has been adopted; and Whereas more than 8 years have passed since the Supreme Court of the United States decided the historic Pelton Dam decision in Federal Power Commission v. Oregon, 349 U.S. 435 (1955), raising the serious question as to whether unappropriated water on reserved or withdrawn lands such as land in national forests, national parks, military reservations, Federal grazing lands and other categories of public land reserved for future Federal use, where subject to appropriation under State law; and Whereas this uncertainty gives rise to a clash of interests between the citizens of the western irrigation States and the U.S. Government, its agencies and licensees as to the right to divert, use or store the surface and underground waters within the territorial limits of said States; and Whereas the Select Committee on National Water Resources of the U.S. Senate, a bipartisan group, reported in January of 1961, after an exhaustive study, that "the broadening patern of these conflicts is conclusive proof of the urgent need for clear-cut, definitive action on the part of Congress to work out with the States a redefining of Federal-State powers and responsibilities for control, use and development of water resources"; and Whereas the same identical position has recently been taken by both National and California agencies; such as, the National Reclamation Association, the American Bar Association, Council of State Governments, American Farm Bureau, Irrigation Districts Association of California, State chamber of commerce, Southern California Water Coordinating Conference, metropolitan water district and the department of water and power; and Whereas Attorney General Stanley Mosk has recently urged all members of the California delegation in Congress to support S. 1275, introduced by Senator Thomas H. Kuchel, of California, a Republican, and Senator Frank E. Moss, of Utah, a Democrat; and Whereas Attorney General Mosk has consistently sponsored such action by the Congress to uphold State water rights, and in his public statement and letter to Members of the Congress supporting S. 1275, stated: "Among those of us in the West who have worked, litigated, and negotiated about water problems, the issues are not only nonpartisan but, we believe noncontroversial"; and Whereas this board of supervisors, upon the prior recommendation of the County Counsel Harold W. Kennedy in May of 1960, adopted a similar resolution urging the clarification of Federal-State water rights and, in the interim, has rendered financial support to the Feather River Project Association, which organization was partially organized to improve relationships between the Federal and State governments, and has permitted Country Counsel Kennedy to serve the past 2 years as chairman of the Special Federal-State Water Rights Committee: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles, in confirmation of the official action heretofore taken, That it once again urges the Congress of the United States to adopt S. 1275; that, subject to constitutional limitations imposed by the commerce, property, or treaty powers, the method of establishing property rights in the appropriation, diversion, use or storage of surface and underground waters within the limits of the respective States shall be subject to longstanding State laws; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded by the clerk of the board to U.S. Senators Thomas H. Kuchel and Frank E. Moss, and to members of the California delegation in the Congress; and that copies be sent to the executive directors of the National and State organizations recited in this resolution. STATEMENT BY SUPERVISOR WARREN M. DORN IN PRESENTING EXTENDED RESOLUTION PLACING THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ON RECORD IN SUPPORT OF CLARIFYING LEGISLATION ON FEDERAL-STATE WATER RIGHTS I have handed to the clerk, and will ask the clerk to read only the resolving portion of the resolution which would again put the county of Los Angeles on record in support of the need for legislation to clarify relationships between the United States and the States in the use of waters and certain streams, most of it orginating in the public domain. This resolution is similar to the one that the board adopted in May of 1960, upon the recommendation of County Counsel Harold W. Kennedy, at a time shortly after the so-called Pelton Dam case, which cast doubt upon the State ownership of unappropriated waters, and at a time when the Federal Government, in litigation over waters of the San Joaquin River, filed a brief contending that the Federal Government had title to both the public domain and the water arising in it. Senator Thomas H. Kuchel and Senator Frank E. Moss, a Democrat, of Utah, have jointly introduced S. 1275, and as the resolution recites, it has been widely endorsed by a large number of Federal and State water agencies. Board members may recall that a week before last, Attorney General Stanley Mosk came out strongly in support of S. 1275, and personally urged every member of the California delegation in the Congress to support the bill. Attorney General Mosk in 1961, sponsored a similar resolution before the Western Association of Attorneys General, which was unanimously adopted. In his communication to Members of the Congress, Mr. Mosk recited, "Among those who have worked, litigated, and negotiated about water problems, the issues are not only nonpartisan but, we believe, noncontroversial." This program and S. 1275 has emerged partly through the activities of the Special Federal-State Water Rights Committee of the Feather River Project Association, which County Counsel Harold W. Kennedy has headed, and is in keeping with the unanimous action taken at the western water law symposium held in Los Angeles under the auspices of the National District Attorneys Association, where Mr. Kennedy served as cochairman. This legislation has the strong support of all of the local water agencies, including Southern California Water Coordinating Conference, the Water and Power Committee of the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, Metropolitan Water District, and the Department of Water and Power. RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES Whereas the longstanding and unsolved jurisdictional dispute between the Federal Government and the 17 western irrigation States over the unappropriated waters lying in the rivers and streams of California and other States in the West demands clarification; and Whereas during the past decade several efforts have been made to secure affirmative action by the Congress of the United States to clarify the relationship of interests of the United States and of the States in the use of the waters of certain streams, but, up to the present time, no bill has been adopted; and Whereas more than 8 years have passed since the Supreme Court of the United States decided the historic Pelton Dam decision in Federal Power Commission v. Oregon 349 U.S. 435 (1955), raising the serious question as to whether unappropriated water on reserved or withdrawn lands such as land in national forests, national parks, military reservations, Federal grazing lands, and other categories of public land reserved for future Federal use, were subject to appropriation under State law; and Whereas this uncertainty gives rise to a clash of interests between the citizens of the western irrigation States and U.S. Government, its agencies and licensees as to the right to divert use or store the surface and underground waters within the territorial limits of said States; and Whereas the Select Committee on National Water Resources of the U.S. Senate, a bipartisan group, reported in January of 1961, after an exhaustive study, that "the broadening pattern of these conflicts is conclusive proof of the urgent need for clear-cut definitive action on the part of Congress to work out with the States a redefining of Federal-State powers and responsibilities for control, use and development of water resources"; and Whereas the same identical position has recently been taken by both national and California agencies, such as, the National Reclamation Association, the American Bar Association, Council of State Governments, American Farm Bureau, Irrigation Districts Association of California, State chamber of commerce, Southern California Water Coordinating Conference, metropolitan water district, and the department of water and power; and Whereas Attorney General Stanley Mosk has recently urged all members of the California delegation in Congress to support S. 1275, introduced by Senator Thomas H. Kuchel, of California, a Republican, and Senator Frank E. Moss, of Utah, a Democrat; and Whereas Attorney General Mosk has consistently sponsored such action by the Congress to uphold State water rights, and in his public statement and letters to Members of the Congress supporting S. 1275, stated: "Among those of us in the West who have worked, litigated, and negotiated about water problems, the issues are not only nonpartisan but, we believe, noncontroversial"; and Whereas this board of supervisors, upon the prior recommendation of County Counsel Harold W. Kennedy in May of 1960, adopted a similar resolution urging the clarification of Federal-State water rights and, in the interim, has rendered financial support to the Feather River Project Association, which organization was partially organized to improve relationships between the Federal and State Governments, and has permitted County Counsel Kennedy to serve the past 2 years as chairman of the Special Federal-State Water Rights Committee: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Los Angeles, in confirmation of the official action heretofore taken, That it once again urges the Congress of the United States to adopt S. 1275; that, subject to constitutional limitations imposed by the commerce, property, or treaty powers, the method of establishing property rights in the appropriation, diversion, use, or storage of surface and underground waters within the limits of the respective States shall be subject to longstanding State laws; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded by the clerk of the board to U.S. Senators Thomas H. Kuchel and Frank E. Moss, and to members of the California delegation in the Congress; and that copies be sent to the executive directors of the National and State organizations recited in this resolution. MISSOURI RIVER STATES COMMITTEE, April 6, 1964. Hon. THOMAS H. KUCHEL, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR KUCHEL: The Missouri River States Committee, which membership is composed of the 10 Governors of the Missouri River Basin States and two other representatives from each of the basin States, has directed me to inform you of their support of S. 1275. This bill was discussed at considerable length during the meeting of committee held in Omaha, Nebr., on March 25, 1964. It was unanimously agreed by the committee to urge the 88th Congress to enact S. 1275 into law and thereby end the controversy that now exists over Federal-State water right legislation. It was also agreed to request that the committee consider an amendment to the bill which would permit lines 5 and 6 on page 2 to read “or consumptive or other use of water." Line 10 on page 2 should be amended to read "or consumptive or other use of any water." It would be greatly appreciated if your committee would permit these considerations. Sincerely yours, MILO W. HOISVEEN, Acting Secretary. (Resolutions or other expressions of support for S. 1275 were also received from the following:) State of Utah, County Commissioners of San Juan County Nevada County (Calif.) Farm Bureau Board of Supervisors, County of (California): Alameda Butte Contra Costa (ex officio the governing board of the Contra Costa County Water Agency) Del Norte Fresno Humboldt Inyo Kings Mendocino Modoc Mono Placer Riverside Sacramento San Mateo Santa Barbara (with joint resolution with board of directors of Santa Barbara County Flood Control & Water Conservation District) Solano Sonoma Tehama Tuloumne Ventura Yolo Yuba Board of supervisors, Flood Control & Water Conservation District, County of (California): San Joaquin Kern County Water Agency Orange County Water District San Luis Obispo Siskiyou Board of Supervisors, Flood Control and Water Conservation District, county of (California): Santa Clara Fallbrook Public Utility District Coachella Valley County Water District Bueno Colorado Municipal Water District PRESS COMMENT ON S. 1275 [From the Los Angeles Times, Mar. 18, 1964] THE GOVERNOR'S LONELY WATER "FIGHT" In California's water rights battles, Governor Brown lately seems to be a general with a staff but no troops-and often headed in the wrong direction. The Governor has already disappointed many Californians with his lack of forceful insistence upon necessary safeguards for the State's interests in the proposed Pacific Southwest regional water plan. Last week it happened again. This time it was Brown's response to an important bill by Senator Thomas Kuchel, of California, clarifying Federal-State water jurisdiction. The bill, urgently needed in the present tangle of confused and conflicting water rights, was up for hearings before a Senate Interior subcommittee. |