Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
TABLE 5.1 States According to Their Basic Approach to Allocating
Surface Water
Dual Systems
(appropriate and
riparian rights)
Regulated
Riparianism
Appropriate Rights
Riparian Rights
Arizona
a
Alabama
b
Alaska
Connecticut
Arkansas
b
Colorado
California
Delaware
Illinois
a
Idaho
Kansas
Florida
Montana
Nebraska
Georgia
Indiana
Hawaii
c
Louisiana
d
Nevada
North Dakota
New Mexico
Oklahoma
Iowa
Maine
Utah
Oregon
Kentucky
Missouri
Wyoming
South Dakota
Maryland
New Hampshire
Texas
Massachusetts
Ohio
Michigan
e
Washington
Pennsylvania
Minnesota
Rhode Island
South Carolina
a
Mississippi
New Jersey
Tennessee
New York
e
Vermont
North Carolina
b
Virginia
b
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Source:
Joseph W. Dellapenna, professor of law, Villanova University: rapporteur, Water Resources
Law Committee of the International Law Association: and director, Model Water Code Project of the
American Society of Civil Engineers.
a
The state has a regulated riparian system for groundwater, but not for surface water.
b
The state has enacted a regulated riparian system but has largely not implemented it.
c
Hawaii has a compound of ancient customary and prescriptive rights and regulated riparian rights.
d
Louisiana follows riparian principles, but as derived from French law and expressed in its civil code
rather than as part of the common law tradition.
e
The state has enacted a regulated riparian statute that applies only to very large users on certain
limited water sources.
Equal Rights to Water?
As a whole, however, riparian water dis-
bursement in the eastern United States entails a doctrine of pub-
lic trust, according to Sims. “The water is held in trust for the
benefi t of the public, and the allocation of specifi c quantities of
water becomes a governmental decision. The government—state,
regional, water basin, or other water-controlling entity—says
to one party, 'You can have this much water,' and to someone else,
'You can't have what you want.' There's really almost no federal
