Sweeping claims to water in the western part of the U.S. by the federal government, supported by favorable court decisions, have been met with stiff protest from municipal leaders, the states, and Congress itself. As demands for water draw drastically upon present sources of supply, conflicts between state and federal control and use of water have intensified. The problem is national in scope, but its impact is greatest in the public land states of the semiarid west, where the water margin is thinnest, and where federal ownership of millions of acres of land establishes a federal premise for claiming proprietorship, paramount rights, or title in fee simple absolute to all unappropriated waters in many states.

This article discusses legal cases related to water rights litigation and utility liability. Specific cases are briefly discussed on water rights in Colorado, California watersheds, Texas water rights, annexation and merger, California water rights taxation cases, water contracts, liability for negligence, sovereign immunity, urban development, damages, and liability for surface flows.

Municipal counsel throughout the nation must reevaluate the relationship of local and federal government as a result of the Supreme Court opinion in Arizona v. California. The decision authorizes the Secretary of Interior to exercise previously unparalleled powers over the Colorado River's water supply in times of shortage. Secretary Stewart Udall reacted to the decision by immediately proposing a 1.9‐billion‐dollar regional development plan to produce water for the five states served by the lower Colorado. This political solution has, generally, been well‐received by local leaders.

No abstract

No abstract