16 U.S.C. § 1284

Existing State jurisdiction and responsibilities

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 16 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Fish and wildlife

Nothing in this chapter shall affect the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the States with respect to fish and wildlife. Hunting and fishing shall be permitted on lands and waters administered as parts of the system under applicable State and Federal laws and regulations unless, in the case of hunting, those lands or waters are within a national park or monument. The administering Secretary may, however, designate zones where, and establish periods when, no hunting is permitted for reasons of public safety, administration, or public use and enjoyment and shall issue appropriate regulations after consultation with the wildlife agency of the State or States affected.

(b) Compensation for water rights

The jurisdiction of the States and the United States over waters of any stream included in a national wild, scenic or recreational river area shall be determined by established principles of law. Under the provisions of this chapter, any taking by the United States of a water right which is vested under either State or Federal law at the time such river is included in the national wild and scenic rivers system shall entitle the owner thereof to just compensation. Nothing in this chapter shall constitute an express or implied claim or denial on the part of the Federal Government as to exemption from State water laws.

Designation of any stream or portion thereof as a national wild, scenic or recreational river area shall not be construed as a reservation of the waters of such streams for purposes other than those specified in this chapter, or in quantities greater than necessary to accomplish these purposes.

(d) State jurisdiction over included streams

The jurisdiction of the States over waters of any stream included in a national wild, scenic or recreational river area shall be unaffected by this chapter to the extent that such jurisdiction may be exercised without impairing the purposes of this chapter or its administration.

(e) Interstate compacts

Nothing contained in this chapter shall be construed to alter, amend, repeal, interpret, modify, or be in conflict with any interstate compact made by any States which contain any portion of the national wild and scenic rivers system.

(f) Rights of access to streams

Nothing in this chapter shall affect existing rights of any State, including the right of access, with respect to the beds of navigable streams, tributaries, or rivers (or segments thereof) located in a national wild, scenic or recreational river area.

(g) Easements and rights-of-way

The Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Agriculture, as the case may be, may grant easements and rights-of-way upon, over, under, across, or through any component of the national wild and scenic rivers system in accordance with the laws applicable to the national park system and the national forest system, respectively: Provided, That any conditions precedent to granting such easements and rights-of-way shall be related to the policy and purpose of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 90–542, § 13, Oct. 2, 1968, 82 Stat. 917.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases, 1980–2018 · leading case: Potlatch Corp. v. United States, 12 P.3d 1260 (Idaho 2000).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Potlatch Corp. v. United States, 12 P.3d 1260 (Idaho 2000). · cites it 4× “§ 668dd(i); Wild and Scenic Rivers Act § 13(b), 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (b). In the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act Congress used the "no claim or denial" language and then expressly reserved water in another section of the Act.”

Defenders of Wildlife v. Cecil D. Andrus, in His Off. Capacity as Sec'y of the Interior, 627 F.2d 1238 (D.C. Cir. 1980). “16 U.S.C. § 1284 (a). 7 Far from attempting to alter the traditional division of authority over wildlife *1249 management, FLPMA broadly and explicitly reaffirms it.”

Merced Irrigation Dist. v. Cnty. of Mariposa, 941 F. Supp. 2d 1237 (E.D. Cal. 2013). “21, 29:13-15 (quoting 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (d).) In drafting Section 1284(d), Congress carefully balanced the respective jurisdictions of the state and federal governments over WSRA waters, and “federal courts have a compelling interest in determining exactly where that…”

Double R Ranch Trust v. Nedd, 284 F. Supp. 3d 21 (D.C. Cir. 2018). · cites it 2× “They point to section 1284(d) as the basis for this contention, which limits state jurisdiction over river waters if that jurisdiction cannot be exercised "without impairing the purposes of" the Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (d). Pls.' Opp'n at 10. But again, this section applies to…”

Sierra Club v. Lyng, 661 F. Supp. 1490 (D. Colo. 1987). “The government supports its argument by directing my attention to sections 13(b), (c) and (d) of the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (b)-(d). 2 There, “Congress incorporated the identical wording of section 4(d)(7) of the Wilderness Act with language that recognizes…”

Great N. Nekoosa Corp. v. United States, 544 F. Supp. 511 (D. Me. 1982). “For reasons set forth above, the Court rejects this argument and concludes that the likely inclusion of the Allagash Wilderness Waterway into the federal wild and scenic rivers system would have been regarded as a highly relevant fact by any willing buyer of the Allagash Parcel…”

State v. St. Croix Cnty., 2003 WI App 173 (Wis. Ct. App. 2003). “4 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (d) provides: State jurisdiction over included streams.”

Grand Canyon Dories, Inc. v. Idaho Outfitters & Guides Bd., 709 F.2d 1250 (9th Cir. 1983). “16 U.S.C. § 1284 (d) (1976). The Outfitters and Guides Act, however, contributes to the federal goal of preserving scenic river areas.”

Double R Ranch Trust v. Bail (D.D.C. 2018). · cites it 2× “They point to section 1284(d) as the basis for this contention, which limits state jurisdiction over river waters if that jurisdiction cannot be exercised “without impairing the purposes of” the Act, 16 U.S.C. § 1284 (d). Pls.’ Opp’n at 10. But again, this section applies to…”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.