| Abstract: | ABSTRACT: There is a growing need for water regulations in states traditionally managed by the riparian doctrine. Several states have passed water laws to control withdrawals from streams. Few, if any, however, have set up consistent and defensible methods for allocating water to users. This paper explores several methods for such allocations, examining each in detail and offering numerical examples that compare each on the basis of economic efficiency and effectiveness for maintaining critical stream‐flow standards. This work is part of a study to assess the vulnerability of Midwestern streams to climate change and, especially, surface supplied irrigation spawned by such climate change. The results suggest that it is possible to implement regulations that at once (1) are consistent with the riparian doctrine; (2) control the hydrological and ecological impacts of off stream withdrawals effectively; and (3) preserve the primary economic functions of those withdrawals, including minimizing economic risk. The results further suggest that trading of water permits improves the latter two objectives, but only if both the regulatory system and permit are well‐designed. On the other hand, in the absence of regulations, or under poorly designed regulations, streamflows, and therefore aquatic ecosystems, could be quite vulnerable. |
