Search

The article focuses on commemorating the 40th anniversary of the publication, reflecting on its founding principles, and looking ahead to the future. It highlights the publication's commitment to promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in higher education amidst challenges. It underscores the importance of continuing to lead with relevance and resilience while expressing gratitude for support from the community.

In this article, the author discusses his business venture as president of the new national publication called "Black Issues In Higher Education." It mentions information and resource void for Black higher education professionals, and fulfilling the need that Blacks sought for opportunities for advancement in higher education. It also mentions getting introduced and feeling intimidated by higher education's elite thinkers and brilliant leaders.

The conflict between aesthetic and utilitarian uses for water resources is growing and is being resolved in legislatures and courts. The evolution of water law in process to include aesthetic values in determining beneficial use is explored.

The water resource has a wide range of interactions in socio‐economic development processes. Water projects that enhance the attributes of water, or control its negative effects, may stimulate development and have been used as development tools. However, studies of the impact of water availability and investment in water projects on development have produced mixed results, with some studies focusing on the United States detecting no positive correlation between water and patterns of socio‐economic development. These findings may not be universally applicable due to the impact of such variables as extent of direct governmental involvement in development, level of water availability, and prevailing mix of economic activities. Water must be viewed as one of several elements of the growth process with potential to become a limiting factor. Thus, water development cannot be used indiscriminately as a mechanism to stimulate socioeconomic advancement, but appropriate attention must be given as part of a broad assessment of the many interacting factors important to socio‐economic advancement.

Projects for disposal of wastes by application to land must be implemented within a complex framework of institutional constraints, with landuse controls a significant component. Controls imposed by local government are the most direct form of constraint and include zoning ordinances and local environmental controls. Local governmental controls are especially significant where publicly owned land application projects are proposed outside the political boundaries of the owner since such location is likely to generate controversy. The applicability of local controls to extraterritorial projects varies under existing state enabling legislation and judical determinations. A second relevant land‐use constraint is the private lawsuit based on property rights. Landowners have the legal right to be free from unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of property. The rights of landowners adjacent to a land application facility therefore act as a constraint on offsite impacts and have some potential to provide a basis for legal prohibition of such facilities. Therefore land use controls, both publicly and privately enforced, are a determinant of the feasibility of land application proposals.

Land application of municipal effluents is encouraged by existing federal water quality legislation and regulations as an alternative to conventional surface water discharge of partially treated effluent. However, conversion to the land application approach may impact downstream water users since the associated operations are likely to increase water consumption or change the location of return flows, or both. The legal status of such changes must be evaluated by application of state water law. In the western United States, the doctrine of prior appropriation protects appropriators whose water rights depend on return flows of prior appropriators by restricting changes in the manner in which the prior rights are exercised. In the East, the riparian doctrine sets limits on the amount of water consumption and place of water use. Although there is little direct precedent interpreting the principles of the two doctrines in relation to land application, potential constraints exist. This paper evaluates the significance of these constraints and the possible impact of water law on the adoption of the land application technique.

Maintenance of minimum flows necessary for protection of instream water uses has been recognized as a significant water management issue in some of the eastern states. The riparian doctrine, a primary component of the water law of several eastern states, offers some protection to instream uses since it offers protection to riparian land values and requires a sharing of water among landowners along the length of each stream. In addition, legal provisions for recognition of instream uses in federal water management programs apply, and many of the eastern states have adopted applicable legislative measures such as direct controls over water use, programs for preservation of scenic rivers, and minimum release requirements for impoundments. However, such measures do not apply uniformly among the riparian states, and existing legal mechanisms may be inadequate in some cases. Therefore, additional institutional development will likely be necessary to assure continuance of a socially desirable balance between instream and offstream water uses as water demand increases over time.

Water law typically evolves through several stages in response to changing demands. Changes are likely to result in reallocation among different interests that compete for water resources. Water law at a given time is not value‐neutral, but favors certain uses over others based on the prevailing values during its formative period. Because of the diffusion of values throughout a water‐allocation system, any change in the system is likely to effect a reallocation of the resource. Significant reallocations have occurred at different times during the history of the eastern states. Most recently, substitution of water‐use permitting programs for common‐law allocation systems has resulted in reallocation from certain types of landowners (such as riparian proprietors) to a broader cross section of society. These changes have strengthened the concept that water is a public resource while eroding the exclusive rights once associated with the ownership of certain property.