<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Aquafornia &#187; Water Rights</title>
	<atom:link href="http://aquafornia.com/archives/category/water-rights/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://aquafornia.com</link>
	<description>The California Water News blog!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 16:49:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Federal Court rules state &#8220;area of origin&#8221; laws do not require Bureau of Reclamation to preferentially deliver water to the Sacramento Valley</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/60059</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/60059#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 11 Jan 2012 15:33:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=60059</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the KMTG Natural Resources Blog: &#8220;KMTG attorney Hanspeter Walter recently published an article in the California Water Law and Policy Reporter discussing a 2011 federal court decision, Tehama Colusa Canal Authority v. U.S. Department of the Interior, which interpreted California&#8217;s &#8220;Area of Origin&#8221; laws. &#8230; &#8220; For the link to the article, click here.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/60059/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Friday&#8217;s top of the scroll: A battle over water rights: National Ski Areas Association to sue U.S. Forest Service over water rights issue</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/59510</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/59510#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Dec 2011 16:13:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=59510</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From ESPN: &#8220;Ski resorts are feuding with their Forest Service landlord over a water rights clause in updated ski area permitting regulations that keeps water rights tied to the land, not the resort operator. After intense lobbying &#8212; which included stern letters from a host of congressman and senators &#8212; last week the Forest Service [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/59510/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Federal Claims Court holds that only the right to the beneficial use of water constitutes a compensable water right under California law</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58850</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58850#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Dec 2011 16:51:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wildlife & Endangered Species]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=58850</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Somach Simmons &#038; Dunn, this Environmental Law &#038; Policy Alert: &#8220;In Casitas Municipal Water District v. United States (December 5, 2011), No. 05168L Court of Federal Claims, ___ Fed.Cl. ___, the Court of Federal Claims held that the only compensable water right that can be obtained under California law is a right to beneficial [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58850/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Water rights market keep forward motion</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58757</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58757#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 15:42:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=58757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Living in Actively Moving Water, a blog about water rights and water markets, this article from the Electronic Business Journal (hat tip to the Water Sisweb): &#8220;When EBJ last reported on water rights markets in the latterpart of 2008, the sense among industry analysts and market players was that the U.S. market for water [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58757/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Liberty Blog: Water rights and takings law</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58589</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58589#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:18:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=58589</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Damien Schiff at the Pacific Legal Foundation&#8217;s Liberty Blog: &#8220;Today I’m speaking at a CLE conference here in Sacramento on water rights. Here’s a little excerpt from my remarks. But in the case of water rights, the right to exclude is not paramount; rather, what is paramount is the right of use. Water rights [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/58589/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Restore the Delta&#8217;s blog: Wandering in the house of mirrors with the California Water Commission</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56351</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56351#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2011 13:21:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=56351</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Restore the Delta&#8217;s blog: &#8220;Does the State Water Project’s largest contractor have enough customers actually willing to pay for the conveyance being contemplated? With that question in mind, let us turn to our report on the California Water Commission meeting on Wednesday afternoon. At the Water Commission, DWR is urging Commissioners to act under [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56351/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On the Public Record blog: Area of origin rights to future water.</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56046</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56046#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Oct 2011 13:12:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=56046</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the On the Public Record blog: &#8220;Both the editorials from the source areas assert their right to enough water for future growth. Calaveras and Tuolumne editorial: Lopez said the draft could also affect future water rights and does not recognize communities’ rights as “areas of origin” to eventually use available water for future development. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/56046/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California’s water rights dispute rages on</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55258</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55258#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Sep 2011 14:42:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=55258</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Western Farm Press: &#8220;This case involved a dispute over water rights to California’s two largest rivers. An association of 16 water contracting agencies from north of the San Joaquin-Sacramento River Delta sought to establish superior water rights under water service contracts that would limit and exclude the export of water south of the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55258/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Plumas County: Water rights holders continue weighing options</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55175</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55175#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 Sep 2011 15:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=55175</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Plumas County News: &#8220;Indian Creek water rights holders bombarded state water officials with questions when they came to Taylorsville Tuesday, Sept. 20. Many knew it was too late to prevent hundreds and thousands of dollars in charges on their tax bills come December, so the verification of that by the state and the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/55175/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Water Wars blog: Homeward bound: The areas of origin</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54727</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54727#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Sep 2011 14:47:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=54727</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the California Water Wars (a new blog): &#8220;Protecting the “areas of origin” is the mantra of the North — and should be. It is at the core of California’s water dispute. It is the essential reason northern Californians overwhelming rejected the Peripheral Canal nearly 30 years ago. It is the final turf proclamation of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54727/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thursday&#8217;s top of the scroll: Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority plans to appeal Area-of-Origin ruling</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54535</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54535#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Sep 2011 15:53:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=54535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From ACWA&#8217;s Water News: &#8220;A northern California water district announced today it plans to appeal the decision of a federal district court in an area-of-origin water rights case. In August, Judge Oliver Wanger ruled in a suit filed by Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority that Central Valley Project contractors in the Sacramento Valley are not entitled to [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/54535/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Northern California counties denied priority water rights</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53097</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53097#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Aug 2011 15:33:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[area of origin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Wanger]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[water rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=53097</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Courthouse News Service: &#8220;In a longstanding dispute over the rights to water from California&#8217;s two largest rivers, a federal judge denied a Sacramento-area water authority&#8217;s claim that its residents deserve the first right to water from their own watersheds, before it&#8217;s pumped 500 miles south through federally funded canals to the desert farmlands [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53097/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Monday&#8217;s top of the scroll: Analysis: Water rights trade to help quench world thirst</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53025</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53025#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Aug 2011 14:41:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=53025</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Maven is officially baaaack! So pleased to be here, blogging from the Aquafornia headquarters in Southern California, where the air is blissfully dry and the bugs are few! A BIG thank you to Susan Lauer at the Water Education Foundation for keeping things going for y&#8217;all while I was gone. And now, from Reuters News: [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/53025/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>District Court Rejects Claims to Area of Origin Priority by Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52963</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52963#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 05 Aug 2011 15:30:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Susan Lauer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=52963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann &#038; Girard Water users in the Sacramento Valley have no preferential right to delivery of Central Valley Project water under the state’s so-called “area of origin” laws, according to the U.S. District Court in Fresno. The “area of origin” laws allow water users within an area where water originates to apply [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52963/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Sacramento Valley farmers lose area-of-origin lawsuit</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52768</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52768#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:21:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Susan Lauer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=52768</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Chico Enterprise-Record A case for area-of-origin water rights in the Sacramento Valley was shot down Friday by a federal court judge. The Tehama-Colusa Canal Authority, with landowners in Tehama, Glenn, Colusa, and Yolo counties, made the case that its water users should have priority in dry years over federal water contractors south of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52768/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Water rights permit couple to keep aquatic features, greenery</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52758</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52758#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 02 Aug 2011 15:08:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Susan Lauer</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=52758</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Las Vegas Review-Journal Count Guido Roberto Deiro and his wife, Joan, call their home Villa Kismet&#8230;.The property draws a lot of attention from visitors to the nearby community orchard. Some even knock on their door to ask how the Deiros pull it off in this desert dwelling. &#8220;I tell them, &#8216;I own my [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/52758/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Report: Alive but irrelevant: The prior appropriation doctrine in today’s western water law</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/50539</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/50539#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Jun 2011 14:46:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=50539</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Social Science Research Network (hat tip to the Water Sisweb!): &#8220;The Prior Appropriation Doctrine has long been the foundation of laws governing water allocation and use in the American West, but it has been under pressure from forces both external and internal to the western states. Twenty years ago, Prior Appropriation was pronounced [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/50539/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Thursday&#8217;s top of the scroll: Clash over water rights heads to Fresno court</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49965</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49965#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 15:26:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=49965</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Fresno Bee: &#8220;A group of Sacramento Valley water districts is going to court today in Fresno, claiming they should get their entire federal water allotment before one drop heads to the San Joaquin Valley. It&#8217;s a bold claim that, if successful, could upend California&#8217;s intricately woven water world – and starve the west [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49965/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>United States Supreme Court holds that under Montana and Wyoming state law, the No Injury Rule does not apply to reduced return flows caused by installation of more efficient irrigation systems</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49640</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49640#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 May 2011 15:52:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Agriculture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Conservation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=49640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Somach Simmons &#038; Dunn, an Environmental Law &#038; Policy Alert on a case with possible implications for California: &#8220;On May 2, 2011, the United States Supreme Court held that upstream appropriators’ use of more efficient irrigation systems did not breach a river compact between Montana and Wyoming because the compact incorporated the doctrine of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/49640/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District releases plan for revenue-generating water use opportunities; plan includes pursuing industrial customers, selling water to other areas, watershed restoration work</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/48587</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/48587#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 May 2011 15:14:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Northern California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=48587</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Eureka Times-Standard: &#8220;In response to higher water rates and the need to maintain water rights, the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District recently released a draft plan of action to pursue possible revenue-generating uses for its abundance of water. The plan, created after a year of extensive outreach to community groups and agencies, presents [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/48587/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Australia: Investors dip their toes in water rights</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47565</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47565#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Apr 2011 15:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[International Water Issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=47565</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Australian: &#8220;Investors who subscribe to the &#8220;straw hats in winter&#8221; theory could do worse than wade into water rights, given the abundance of the vital commodity on the eastern seaboard. With flood waters coursing down the Murray-Darling system, the price of water &#8212; which includes permanent rights and annual allocations &#8212; has plunged [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47565/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Private Water Law Blog: California mutual water company basics</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47468</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47468#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:13:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=47468</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Private Water Law blog: &#8220;I have noticed that a number of readers find their way to my blog seeking information related to California mutual water companies. In an effort to respond to that apparent demand, this post is devoted to some of the basics of those organizations. There are many nuances and other [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/47468/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Court denies rehearing; Water districts to be compensated; The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation delivered less water to the districts than the government promised to provide</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46666</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46666#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Mar 2011 15:31:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=46666</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Environmental Protection: &#8220;The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a ruling that puts an end to litigation between the Stockton East Water District, Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District, and the California Water Service Company. The litigation centered on whether the water districts had a contractual right to receive water [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46666/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Press release: Major victory for California water districts as Federal Circuit denies government petition for rehearing</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46459</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46459#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 25 Mar 2011 15:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=46459</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Digital Journal, this press release from Marzullo Law LLC: &#8220;The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a ruling that puts an end to litigation between the Stockton East Water District, Central San Joaquin Water Conservation District, and the California Water Service Company. The litigation centered on whether the [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/46459/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wednesday&#8217;s top of the scroll: San Joaquin County sues over access to American River</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/43353</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/43353#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 23 Feb 2011 16:57:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=43353</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Stockton Record: &#8220;San Joaquin County&#8217;s half-century effort to drink from the American River is headed to court. The county has filed a lawsuit against the State Water Resources Control Board, which last year rejected San Joaquin&#8217;s longstanding request to take water from that stream to the north. The lawsuit, filed Feb. 16, says [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/43353/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Calistoga: Reynolds vows to appeal water suit ruling</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42707</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42707#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Feb 2011 16:16:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Northern California]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=42707</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Weekly Calistogan: &#8220;The plaintiff in a lawsuit against the city of Calistoga centered on conservation of the Upper Napa River watershed plans to continue the fight for compensation for an alleged overdraft of the Kimball reservoir since the early 1950s. A Napa judge ruled against Grant Reynolds and for the city on Jan. [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42707/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal Analysis: Supreme Court issues decision in water right fee case</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42555</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42555#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Feb 2011 16:12:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=42555</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Somach, Simmons &#38; Dunn: &#8220;On January 31, 2011, the California Supreme Court issued its decision in the water right fee case.  There, the Court upheld, as constitutional, the statutes adopted by the Legislature in 2003 imposing new water right fees, but remanded the case back to the superior court for a determination of whether [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/42555/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tuesday&#8217;s top of the scroll: Davis, Woodland seek right to divert Sacramento River water</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/38535</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/38535#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 18 Jan 2011 16:25:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Sacramento]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=38535</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Sacramento Bee: &#8220;A plan to provide better drinking water for Davis and Woodland could have implications well beyond the two Yolo County cities. It could also set a precedent for all future diversions from the Sacramento River. The two cities want the state to grant them a new right to divert 45,000 acre-feet [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/38535/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is it a water-rights fee or a backdoor tax? Calif.&#8217;s high court will decide</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/36414</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/36414#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 03 Dec 2010 16:39:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=36414</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the New York Times: &#8220;The California Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments next week on a case that could undermine the state&#8217;s ability to collect fees for water rights. The state&#8217;s highest court has scheduled the hearing for Tuesday, more than three years after briefs were filed in a legal fight that [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/36414/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>On the Public Record blog: Have we learned nothing?</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35512</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35512#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 14 Nov 2010 16:07:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=35512</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The On the Public Record blog responds to the New York Times article on more Dudley Ridge water rights being sold: &#8220;Didn’t we spend all last year discussing this? The farmers pay a maximum of $500 per acre-foot of water from the state water project, KFSN-TV reported. But the Tejon Ranch is paying the farmers [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35512/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal Analysis: Water right fees, Proposition 26, and the Delta . . .</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35489</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35489#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:34:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=35489</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Somach Simmons &#038; Dunn: &#8220;In 2003, several organizations and hundreds of individual water right holders challenged new charges on water rights enacted by the Legislature under the guise of “regulatory fees.” These organizations and water right holders argued, in part, that the charges violated Proposition 13’s prohibition on new and increased taxes absent [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35489/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Farmers’ water deals stir debate</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35493</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35493#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Nov 2010 14:32:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=35493</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the New York Times Green blog: &#8220;Two farmers in California’s San Joaquin Valley are proposing to do with their water what farmers around the country have done for decades: sell it to developers. The farmers pay a maximum of $500 per acre-foot of water from the state water project, KFSN-TV reported. But the Tejon [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35493/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wedensday&#8217;s top of the scroll: Kings farmers set to sell $11.7M in water rights</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35397</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35397#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Nov 2010 16:43:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=35397</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Hanford Sentinel: &#8220;In the threatened world of Westside agriculture, two more farmers have decided to sell water rights to urban development interests in Southern California. The deal would send 1,998 acre-feet of water from two Kings County growers to Tejon Ranch Co. for $5,850 per acre-foot, or $11.7 million. The water would likely [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35397/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pacific Legal Foundation commentary: Throughout the West, a flood of attacks on water rights</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35328</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35328#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2010 16:31:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=35328</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Lahontan Valley News, this commentary by Brandon Middleton and Damian Schiff of the Pacific Legal Foundation: &#8220;“Water, water, everywhere &#8230;,” begins a famous line by Coleridge. Today, in the American West, assaults on water rights can be seen practically everywhere. Government regulators and environmental activists lead the attacks, and farmers and ranchers are [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/35328/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pacific Legal Foundation: Throughout the west, a flood of attacks on water rights</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/34654</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/34654#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 16:16:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=34654</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Pacific Legal Foundation, posted at YouTube: Throughout the West, water rights are under attack—by government regulators and environmental activists. PLF is fighting back, defending traditional water rights in litigation throughout the region.]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/34654/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Legal fights over water permits continue</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/33008</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/33008#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2010 15:32:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=33008</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Capital Press: &#8220;A San Francisco judge is considering whether to move a lawsuit challenging state water diversion permit requirements out of politically charged Siskiyou County in far Northern California. The state Department of Fish and Game requested a change of venue for the suit filed by the California Farm Bureau Federation, which claimed [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/33008/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Pacific Legal Foundation: More water shortages from bureaucratic red tape?</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/30447</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/30447#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Aug 2010 14:35:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=30447</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Pacific Legal Foundation, posted at YouTube: &#8220;If you believe that water rights are important and that government shouldn&#8217;t undercut them—and that we don&#8217;t need more meddlesome bureaucratic restrictions on water availability—then you&#8217;ll be interested to hear PLF&#8217;s Brandon Middleton describe the issues in California Farm Bureau Federation v. California Department of Fish and [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/30447/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Tribal water rights supported before Congress</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29662</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29662#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 16:00:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Indian Water Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=29662</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Indian Country Today: &#8220;A pair of tribal water rights settlements received renewed attention from Congress just before its break for summer recess. “They are not the most exciting issues around. … but they are very important in the life of tribal governments,” said Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29662/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Chronicles of the Hydraulic Brotherhood blog: 10 water laws of the West</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29660</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29660#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Aug 2010 15:59:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=29660</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From Hugh Holub, reprinted by permission at Lloyd Carter&#8217;s Chronicles of the Hydraulic Brotherhood blog: &#8220;[Note: I am a water attorney. Years ago I was asked to give a speech summarzing Western water law to a group of non-lawyers. This was the result....] Introduction: It does not take a law degree to understand water law [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29660/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don Curlee: Voices of farmers out-shout fish on water-rights issues</title>
		<link>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29210</link>
		<comments>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29210#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Aug 2010 14:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maven</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Water Rights]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://aquafornia.com/?p=29210</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[From the Visalia Times-Delta, this column by Don Curlee: &#8220;An incident involving ranchers defending their rights to water has shown how important it is for farmers to unite, speak up, speak out and speak often. It occurred at the end of May in the Siskiyou County town of Etna, located in the northwest corner of [...]]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://aquafornia.com/archives/29210/feed</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

