Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Evolution of Water Planning in New Mexico and Implications for Transboundary Groundwater Allocation
Before 1983, the market allocated water in New Mexico under the prior-appropriation system; we prohibited export of groundwater to other states. We found, however, that the simple prohibition is unconstitutional, and that water can be withheld only if shown to be needed for the “public welfare.” Water planning began in 1987, to determine which waters (perhaps all) would be needed during the next 40 years. It has become clear that water planning has another value —the reconciliation of future supply with expected demands—which may provide more orderly reallocation than the market would, especially for aesthetic and environmental water uses that are not directly represented in the market. Our water planning seems to be supplanting the legal processes with negotiation, and to be shifting the emphasis from administration of water rights to management of real water. Diverse water-use interests within the planning regions in New Mexico are learning to negotiate their future water-management, and the 16 regions are beginning to interact with each other toward the same end. A strictly technical “wet-water” management plan that shows how the needs of all interests can be best met with the water and the capital available, and at least temporarily setting aside the legal issues, seems to be the best foundation for negotiation. The tentative settlement of a long, unfruitful legal struggle over the Pecos River is a case in point. The same principal seems promising for dealing with transboundary groundwater allocation on a larger scale.
Evolution of Water Planning in New Mexico and Implications for Transboundary Groundwater Allocation
Before 1983, the market allocated water in New Mexico under the prior-appropriation system; we prohibited export of groundwater to other states. We found, however, that the simple prohibition is unconstitutional, and that water can be withheld only if shown to be needed for the “public welfare.” Water planning began in 1987, to determine which waters (perhaps all) would be needed during the next 40 years. It has become clear that water planning has another value —the reconciliation of future supply with expected demands—which may provide more orderly reallocation than the market would, especially for aesthetic and environmental water uses that are not directly represented in the market. Our water planning seems to be supplanting the legal processes with negotiation, and to be shifting the emphasis from administration of water rights to management of real water. Diverse water-use interests within the planning regions in New Mexico are learning to negotiate their future water-management, and the 16 regions are beginning to interact with each other toward the same end. A strictly technical “wet-water” management plan that shows how the needs of all interests can be best met with the water and the capital available, and at least temporarily setting aside the legal issues, seems to be the best foundation for negotiation. The tentative settlement of a long, unfruitful legal struggle over the Pecos River is a case in point. The same principal seems promising for dealing with transboundary groundwater allocation on a larger scale.
Evolution of Water Planning in New Mexico and Implications for Transboundary Groundwater Allocation
Shomaker, John W. (Autor:in)
Water International ; 28 ; 181-184
01.06.2003
4 pages
Aufsatz (Zeitschrift)
Elektronische Ressource
Unbekannt
Strengthening cooperation on transboundary groundwater resources
| Online Contents | 2011
Strengthening cooperation on transboundary groundwater resources
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2011