Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
WRRCTR No.173 Water Code Development in Hawaii: History and Analysis, 1978-1987
|Title:||WRRCTR No.173 Water Code Development in Hawaii: History and Analysis, 1978-1987|
|Authors:||Chang, Williamson B.C.|
show 12 moreGround-Water Use Act
McBryde v. Robinson
Reppun v. Board of Water Supply
Model Water Code
Native Hawaiian claims
|LC Subject Headings:||Water -- Law and legislation -- Hawaii.|
Water rights -- Hawaii.
|Issue Date:||Feb 1987|
|Publisher:||Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa|
|Citation:||Chang WBC. 1987. Water code development in Hawaii: history and analysis, 1978-1987. Honolulu (HI): Water Resources Research Center, University of Hawaii at Manoa. WRRC technical report, 173.|
|Series/Report no.:||WRRC Technical Report|
|Abstract:||During the nine years since the enactment of the amendment to the state constitution calling for a water code, those proposing various codes have faced four main problems identified here as (1) the ownership question, (2) the question of which agency shall ultimately control water allocation, (3) relationship between the state and counties, and (4) the question of Native Hawaiian water rights. Early debate on various codes focused on the issue of ownership. Many parties incorrectly assumed that government regulation could only be based on government ownership of water. The confusion was exacerbated by the decision in McBryde v. Robinson which purported to give corporeal ownership of the water to the state. This report discusses limited duration permit systems that grant the government the power to allocate water without reliance on ownership. Two of the major issues focus on the proper governmental agency for regulation of water. The counties have opposed statewide control over water allocation for fear that the decisions made in Honolulu will not reflect local concerns and out of a concern that county land-use planning decisions will not be supported by water allocation decisions made by a state agency. Secondly, the Department of Health expressed fears that its water quality decisions could be bypassed by powers lodged in the Department of Land and Natural Resources. The last major issue focused on respect for traditional Native Hawaiian water rights that are not clearly defined. The various codes present the possibility that such claims would be nullified. Such a scenario would represent a perpetuation of harm done to the Native Hawaiian which began with the alienation of land from the Hawaiian in the middle nineteenth century.|
|Description:||U.S. Department of the Interior Geological Survey Grant/Contract No. 14-08-0001-G1013 Project No. G1013-02|
|Pages/Duration:||vii + 54 pages|
|Appears in Collections:||WRRC Technical Reports|
Please contact email@example.com if you need this content in an alternative format.
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.