This article is an edited and annotated version of remarks delivered by the author at the FSU College of Law's forum on The Future of the Appalachicola-Chattahoochee-FlinRt iver System: Legal, Policy, and Scientific Issues, held on November 5, 2003. The purpose of the article is to suggest that the greater understanding we have today of the role ecological processes play in delivering tremendous economic value to human populations demands that the law recognize these important ecosystem services as a critical factor in the interstate water apportionment calculus. The author makes this point in the context of the dispute over the Appalachicola-Chattahoochee-Flint River System ("ACF"). The author explains that the "water wars" (disputes over interstate water allocation) have moved East. Will the East simply import interstate allocation law as it has been shaped in the West, or will it forge a new water law for a new water age? The author suggests the latter, proposing that the East mold water law to meet the ecological realities of its great river systems. The author concludes that for Florida to prevail in the ACF dispute, it must urge the Court to consider the full import of Idaho v. Oregon to make its equitable apportionment jurisprudence align with the real reason we care about water – its ecosystem service values.
Ruhl, J. B.
"Equitable Apportionment of Ecosystem Services: New Water Law for a New Water Age,"
Florida State University Journal of Land Use and Environmental Law: Vol. 19
, Article 2.
Available at: https://ir.law.fsu.edu/jluel/vol19/iss1/2