Welcome: Fourth Annual Water Law, Policy and Science Conference

It was Mark Twain who, in 1884, penned the words, and I quote, "Whiskey is for drinking; water is for fighting over."

Land application of wastewater and state water law :

Mode of access: Internet.

Agricultural Water Law in Maryland: The Water Appropriation Application Process and Use in a Time of Drought

To conserve and protect the State's water resources the State of Maryland controls the appropriation or use of its surface waters and groundwater. State law requires all agricultural operations to comply with the water appropriation permitting process, including traditional forms of agriculture, livestock and poultry operations, nursery operations and aquaculture.

First law and the force of water: law, water, entitlement

In this essay, the authors respond to several of the papers included in this special issue. First reflecting on the relation between waters, ‘First law’,1 and settler law, the authors then draw connections between some of the contributions to the issue. Water, the authors contend, is a productive site for thinking through the organs and processes of settler law, though such attention, they argue, also reveals how the ‘constitutional’ question of waters is occluded by the presence and dominance of settler law. The final section turns to Aotearoa/New Zealand as a negative example of this situation, one in which the constituting force of waters is nullified by the incorporation of indigenous politics within the processes and institutions of the settler legal order.

Managing wetlands sustainably as ecosystems : The contribution of the law (part 1)

The ways in which a society set standards of behaviour and of conduct for its members vary hugely. For example, accepted practices, recognised customs, spiritually or morally inspired norms, judicially declared rules, executively formulated edicts, formal legislative enactments or constitutionally embedded rights and duties. Whatever form they assume, these standards are the artificial construction of the human mind. Accordingly the law - whatever its form - can do no more and no less than regulate or set standards for human behaviour, human conduct, and human decision-making. The law cannot regulate the environment. It can only regulate human activities that impact directly or indirectly upon the environment. This applies as much to wetlands as components of the environment as it does to any other components of the environment or the environment at large. The capacity of the law to protect the environment and therefore wetlands is thus totally dependent upon the capacity of the law to regulate human behaviour, human conduct and human decision-making. At the same time the law needs to reflect the specific nature, functions and locations of wetlands. A wetland is an ecosystem by itself; it comprises a range of ecosystems within it; and it is part of a wider set of ecosystems. Hence, the significant ecological functions performed by wetlands. Then there are the benefits flowing to humans from wetlands. These may be social, economic, cultural, aesthetic, or a combination of some or of all of these. It is a challenge for a society acting through its legal system to find the appropriate balance between these ecological and these human values. But that is what sustainability requires.The ways in which a society set standards of behaviour and of conduct for its members vary hugely. For example, accepted practices, recognised customs, spiritually or morally inspired norms, judicially declared rules, executively formulated edicts, formal legislative enactments or constitutionally embedded rights and duties. Whatever form they assume, these standards are the artificial construction of the human mind. Accordingly the law - whatever its form - can do no more and no less than regulate or set standards for human behaviour, human conduct, and human decision-making. The law cannot regulate the environment. It can only regulate human activities that impact directly or indirectly upon the environment. This applies as much to wetlands as components of the environment as it does to any other components of the environment or the environment at large. The capacity of the law to protect the environment and therefore wetlands is thus totally dependent upon the capacity of the law to regulate human behaviour, human conduct and human decision-making. At the same time the law needs to reflect the specific nature, functions and locations of wetlands. A wetland is an ecosystem by itself; it comprises a range of ecosystems within it; and it is part of a wider set of ecosystems. Hence, the significant ecological functions performed by wetlands. Then there are the benefits flowing to humans from wetlands. These may be social, economic, cultural, aesthetic, or a combination of some or of all of these. It is a challenge for a society acting through its legal system to find the appropriate balance between these ecological and these human values. But that is what sustainability requires.

Managing Wetlands Sustainably as Ecosystems: The Contribution of the Law (Part 2)

In this Part 2 attention is turned towards the legal arrangements in nation states for managing wetlands. These national arrangements have effect within the international arrangements already mentioned and any regional arrangements that are relevant. However, each national system is a reflection of its own historical, cultural, political and constitutional background. It is the purpose of this Part 2 to review and assess the national approaches to wetlands management. This involves an analysis of a range of instruments. These are: constitutional rules; strategic rules; regulatory rules; and management rules. Each of these sets of rules performs different functions, assumes different forms and is differentially capable of enforcement.

Murray-Darling basin governance : the focus of the law

The legal arrangements for the management of the Murray-Darling Basin in Australia have changed significantly over the years. The Constitution of the Commonwealth has led to the legal arrangements for the management of the Murray-Darling Basin. The Water Act 2000 of Queensland aimed at advancing sustainable management and efficient use of water and other resources by establishing a system for the planning, allocation and use of water. The Water Management Act 2000 of New South Wales ensures the sustainable and integrated management of the water resources of the state benefiting the present and future generations. The Natural Resources Management Act 2004 of South Australia applies to water resources and to other natural resources. The Act aimed at assisting the achievement of ecologically sustainable development in the state.

A jurisprudential model for sustainable water resources governance

The legal arrangements for the management of water resources are currently a complex matrix of rules of various kinds. These rules perform a diverse range of functions. Some are part of what may be described as the macro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes paralegal rules in the form of statements of value, objective, outcome or principles . Others are part of the micro-legal system for the governance of water resources. This includes traditional legal rules in the form of statements of standards in relation to individual conduct, behaviour or decision making. These legal arrangements may be international, regional, national or local. Accordingly some apply to nation states within the international community. Others apply to the regulatory agencies making decisions about water resources within nation states. Ultimately most of these legal arrangements apply to those who use and develop water resources for particular purposes and in particular locations. In accordance with this framework, rules explain how water resources should be used in particular circumstances and how decisions should be made to ensure the effective planning and regulation of water resources.