Annotated Bibliography of Western Canadian Water Law

 

Australia

 

Bartlett, Richard. Transferability of Water Rights in Australia and the United States: Options and Recommendations, in Water Law in Western Australia: Comparative Studies and Options for Reform, (Perth: The Centre for Commercial and Resources Law, The University of Western Australia, 1997) 89.

      In this essay the author compares the water transfer systems in both the United States and Australia.  The author examines in depth the various types of rights and the ability of each right-holder in both the US and Australia to transfer that right.  The essay includes a list of various statutory provisions relating to water transfer in the United States.  The essay provides a generalized transfer process which outlines the various steps required to complete a water transfer in the US.  The essay is successful in providing an in-depth comparison of the transferability of US and Australian water rights, and concludes with recommendations for an ideal, efficient transfer process.

BM

Curd, Vic and Claus Schonfedlt, “Water Transfers- The South Australian Experience”. Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July; Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            This paper presents a governmental perspective on water transfers in South Australia.  After a short introduction, the paper concentrates on two regions: the Northern Adelaide Plains Proclaimed Region and the River Murray.  Water transfers have been taking place in the Northern Adelaide Plains Proclaimed Region since 1984.  Currently the region is divided into six transfer zones, and transfers from one irrigator to another are subject to a 10% reduction while transfers from an irrigator to an industrial user are reduced by 70%. The River Murray, one of the transfer zones, suffered from a drought in 1967-68, and the water allocations have been frozen at that year’s rate since.  In 1979 the River Murray Water Resources Advisory Committee carried out a review of water allocations.  The review adjusted licenses to reflect actual usage.  It appears that water transfers have been growing in the years leading up to 1990.  The authors suggest two large-scale irrigators are the source of the rapid growth.

NC / NB

Delforce, Robert, John Prigram, Warren Musgrave, and Ray Anderson, “Impediments to Free Market Transfer in Australia”. Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July 1990: Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            This paper consists of two sections: a discussion of the rationale for water transfers and impediments to successful implementation of transferability.  After a review of the reasons for transferability of water entitlements, the authors provide an overview of the transferability of water entitlements (TWE) in the four southeastern Australian states.  This information is summarized in a table. The authors identified two types of impediments to success: the need for rights to be specified adequately and the possible negative consequences of transferability.  To specifically identify the rights, water must be owned independently of the land, the volume available must be known, and there needs to be security of tenure.  The risks the authors identify are sleeper licenses, negative economic consequences, loss of real estate values (and the effect of banks accepting the land as security for a mortgage) and dangers to local communities and traditional small family farms. 

NC / NB

Dudley, Norm, “Alternative Institutional Arrangements for Water Supply Probabilities and Transfers”.  Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July 1990: Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990). 

            This paper is concerned with how institutional arrangements affect allocation of water resources in the long and short terms.  For his analysis, Dudley divides Australia into two regions: the high latitudes with summer droughts and the low latitudes with uniform rainfall.  Dudley develops two models for dealing with uncertainty in the low latitudes where demands for irrigation and water supply are both uncertain.  The first model is capacity sharing (CS) and the second, priority sharing (PS).  Dudley identifies six criteria for an institutional arrangement that will maximize efficient decision-making: security of tenure; flexibility; opportunity cost; predictability of outcomes; equitableness and reflecting public values.  Dudley concludes with a comparison of six different institutional arrangements and identifies CS as the most efficient model.

NC / NB

Howe, Charles, “An Analytical Framework for Water Transfers”. Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July 1990: Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            This paper considers the economic requirements of a water transfer system.  Howe presents models to describe buyers (considering willingness to pay (WTP) based on reliability (seniority or right and ‘future of hydrology’) and quality), sellers (including water salvage), and intervening costs (transaction costs and physical transfer costs).  Howe then combines the models to describe water markets.  Finally, Howe identifies the characteristics desirable in water markets: flexibility, security of tenure, opportunity costs, predictability of outcomes, equitable or fair outcomes, and reflective of public values. 

NC / NB

Langford, K and B. Foley, “Transferable Water Entitlements – Victorian Perspective”. Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July; Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            This paper presents a governmental view about the state of Victoria’s experience with transferable water entitlements (TWE).  The authors begin with a historical review of water allocation in Victoria from 1880 until the present (1990).  Water allocation in Victoria has gone through 4 phases: early development (1880-1905); consolidation phase (1905-1945); post Second World War development phase (1945-1975); post-development phase (or mature phase 1975 to date).  The paper than details the process by which TWEs were introduced in Victoria, from public consultations through temporary TWEs to the Water Act, 1989. The authors also include a rationale for TWEs, and discuss the State’s experience to date.  Finally, the paper includes a copy of the conditions for temporary transfers under the Rural Water Commission of Victoria. 

NC / NB

Malcolm, Duncan, “Water Transfers in Victoria – A User Viewpoint” Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July; Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            Malcolm provides a user viewpoint of transfers in Victoria.  Currently (as of 1990) Victoria uses 50% of its annually sustainable volume of water.  Malcolm provides a brief discussion of economic yield of the water harvested, the security provided, population growth and environmental concerns.  Malcolm than provides an overview of economics of additional supplies, listing many of the concerns of irrigators with permanent transferable water entitlements (TWEs).  He concludes with a series of recommended safeguards.  He does not include any concrete figures regarding the price paid for transfers. 

NC / NB

Morgan, Ted, “Water Transfers – An Irrigation Industry Perspective”. Transferability of Water Entitlements: An International Seminar and Workshop, July; Papers for Presentation. (Armidale: Centre for Water Policy Research, University of New England, NSW, Australia, 1990).

            Morgan provides insight as an irrigator in New South Wales.  His experience with transfers began in 1982-3 where temporary transfers were introduced during a drought.  Morgan describes the consultation following a discussion paper, and generally explains the reaction of irrigators to the paper.  He then describes the introduction of permanent transfers in NSW and the control systems in place.  Finally, Morgan gives an update on the irrigator’s perspective on transferability.  He does not give any concrete figures regarding price of water or number of transfers. 

NC / NB