This paper is concerned with the rights of individuals to withdraw water from permeable materials beneath the land surface, under the basic laws of the States in which they reside. It does not concern itself with limited-purpose statutes that seek only to prevent or abate pollution of naturally fresh waters, or to preclude waste of water; or that require well drillers to be licensed, or logs of wells to be filed with some administrative agency. Neither does it concern itself with certain municipal and local regulations that, to some extent, limit the freedom of action by individuals within those local jurisdictions.
Because water in the United State has not been traded in markets, there is no meaningful estimate of what it would cost if it were traded. But failing to establish ground water's valueâ€"for in situ uses such as sustaining wetlands as well as for extractive uses such as agricultureâ€"will lead to continued overuse and degradation of the nation's aquifers. In Valuing Ground Water an interdisciplinary committee integrates the latest economic, legal, and physical knowledge about ground water and methods for valuing this resource, making it comprehensible to decision-makers involved in Superfund cleanup efforts, local wellhead protection programs, water allocation, and other water-related management issues. Using the concept of total economic value, this volume provides a framework for calculating the economic value of ground water and evaluating tradeoffs between competing uses of it. Included are seven case studies where ground-water valuation has been or could be used in decisionmaking. The committee examines trends in ground-water management, factors that contribute to its value, and issues surrounding ground-water allocation and legal rights to its use. The book discusses economic valuation of natural resources and reviews several valuation methods. Presenting conclusions, recommendations, and research priorities, Valuing Ground Water will be of interest to those concerned about ground-water issues: policymakers, regulators, economists, attorneys, researchers, resource managers, and environmental advocates.
This report aims at integrating regional and country experiences and projects with regard to viable groundwater management practices for the future. It compiles and translates best available present scientific and technical knowledge on groundwater resources and their governance, which is often highly specialized, into simpler language and synoptic representations, accessible to a large public of policy and decision makers across development sectors. It serves as a technical basis for the visioning process, and for the definition of the Framework for Action on groundwater governance.This is one of 3 outputs of project GCP/GLO/277/GEF expected to be published under the names of its 5 partner organizations and widely circulated to policy and decision-makers in countries, as well as other stakeholders of groundwater governance and practionners around the world. This outputs provides the technical basis for the other two: A Global Vision for Groundwater Governance 2030 and Global Framework for Action to Achieve the Vision on Groundwater Governance.
Why do people fight about water rights? Who decides how much water can be used by a city or irrigator? Does the federal government get involved in state water issues? Why is water in Colorado so controversial? These questions, and others like them, are addressed in Colorado Water Law for Non-Lawyers. This concise and understandable treatment of the complex web of Colorado water laws is the first book of its kind. Legal issues related to water rights in Colorado first surfaced during the gold mining era in the 1800s and continue to be contentious today with the explosive population growth of the twenty-first century. Drawing on geography and history, the authors explore the flashpoints and water wars that have shaped Colorado’s present system of water allocation and management. They also address how this system, developed in the mid-1800s, is standing up to current tests—including the drought of the past decade and the competing interests for scarce water resources—and predict how it will stand up to new demands in the future. This book will appeal to at students, non-lawyers involved with water issues, and general readers interested in Colorado’s complex water rights law.
The 28-page Layperson's Guide to Water Rights Law, recognized as the most thorough explanation of California water rights law available to non-lawyers, traces the authority for water flowing in a stream or reservoir, from a faucet or into an irrigation ditch through the complex web of California water rights. It includes historical information on the development of water rights law, sections on surface water rights and groundwater rights, a description of the different agencies involve in water rights, and a section on the issues not only shaped by water rights decisions but that are also driving changes in water rights. Includes chronology of landmark cases and legislation and an extensive glossary.
Groundwater represents about 97 per cent of the fresh water resources available on earth (excluding the water locked in the polar ice), and is of key social, economic, environmental and strategic importance. Aquifers (including numerous transboundary ones) are coming under growing pressure from over-abstraction and pollution, which seriously threaten their sustainability. This publication brings together a range of binding and non-binding international law instruments dealing with groundwater, an emerging body of rules that indicate a trend towards more comprehensive international regulation in this important field.
This paper seeks to answer a number of basic questions. First of all just what are land tenure rights and water rights? Second, how do the respective regimes compare? Third what linkages, if any, are there between land tenure rights and water rights and, if there are none, does this matter, either in general or as regards specific aspects of the interface? A key objective of the paper is to examine which aspects of the rights interface merit further research. In comparing the two regimes a final subsidiary objective of this paper is to try and identify which areas, if any, in one sector can shed light on areas for future research in the other.
