Title: Letter indicating that SFWMD could not support the proposed statement
CITATION PAGE IMAGE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00052914/00001
 Material Information
Title: Letter indicating that SFWMD could not support the proposed statement
Alternate Title: Letter from South Florida WMD to J. T. Griffiths, Florida Citrus Mutual, indicating that SFWMD could not support the proposed statement and explained the variances with the explanation of both other supporters and those opposed.
Physical Description: 1p.
Language: English
Publication Date: June 3, 1981
 Subjects
Spatial Coverage: North America -- United States of America -- Florida
 Notes
General Note: Box 5, Folder 25 ( SF STATE WATER POLICY - VOL. III ), Item 30
Funding: Digitized by the Legal Technology Institute in the Levin College of Law at the University of Florida.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00052914
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: Levin College of Law, University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.

Full Text



South Florida Water'
,oH S jw Management District
P. 0. Box V
^9 ot: o West Palm Beach, Florida 33402 J
JUN 9 1981

4-FCD-20
State Water Policy June 3, 1981 -
Execu ...., ,,


"J. T. Griffiths, Director
Special Projects
Florida Citrus Mutual
P. 0. Box 89
Lakeland, Florida 33802

Dear Jimz

S n Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the statement you propose to present
for inclusion in the State Water Policy. That statement is as follows:

(5) In implementing a consumptive use permitting program, the
Department and Districts shall recognize the qualified rights
of property owners to use the ground water under-their land for
reasonable-beneficial purposes, and shall continually seek main-
tenance of a proper balance between competing users.

"On behalf of the District, I must advise that this inclusion cannot be supported.

Your explanation of what it means is at variance with the explanation of both other
supporters and those opposed..

It is my position that there is no simple 7 line, 10 line or 40 line statement that
can be made as to the legal position with regard to rights to water usage. The
whole subject is complicated by the fact that not all Districts have adopted con-
sumptive use permitting and that you have existing users at the time of adoption of
consumptive use programs (in those Districts that have adopted them) who did not
perfect their right of use within the required 2 year period.

There could be different legal situations with regard to property owners nt present-
ly using water in a District .with consumptive use permitting and those in a District
without it. There could be different legal situations with regard to a water user
who received a consumptive use permit within the 2 year required period and one who
did not. There could be different legal situations with regard to a property owner
who was an existing user and received a consumptive use permit, but desired at a
later date to increase the use of water, and a property owner in a District not in-
volved in permitting who has an existing use and desires to increase it.

All of the suggestions made have been too simplistic an approach to what is obvious-
ly a very.complex legal situation.. I do not have any magical words that can in a
few brief sentences transform these complex legal problems into a statement that
will solve all of the problems.

With best wishes, I am
Sincerely,

John R. Maloy
JR: rglp Executive Director_

"- -:- :'bcc: Executive Directors WMD





University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs