Lincoln County leader. [volume] (Toledo, Lincoln County, Or.) 1893-1987, 1912-03-29
WATER RIGHTS IN OREGON
BY John H. Congress- 1912

more combine, each using the total
allotment for part of the time. we
have what is called irrigation by
rotation. This practice is necessary
where the water of each flowing
continuously is not sufficient to han.
die economically.
Priority.
! Four important qualifications to
I the doctrine of beneficial use are
essential in the complete definition
of a right. The first of these is
priority. This is founded upon the
familiar maxim that he 0ho is prior
in time is prior in right. AS water
in the stream becomes scarce. the
ditch of the last appropriation will
be closed to protect those having
prior rights. AS the water falls
other headgates will be closed by
the water master, and these will be
opened again in case of a rise in
the river.
The present owner may have re-
Gently come into possession of the
right after many transfers from the
original appropriation. but he must
estaDllsh the date when water was
, flrst diverted for his land, or when
legal steps were first taken by the
original owner to establish the right.
Inc water right for a single ditch
may have several dates of priority
III case or subsequent enlargements.
Inc priority is expressed by
uate. In some states an attempt was
made to keep track of priorities by
number, but this led to- confusion
as each number would be changed
and the right becomes correspond.
ingly more valuable in case of the
abandonment of any single right. 1t
ls highly important that the priority
be definitely established before all
OF the witnesses to these important
matters have passed away.
Purpose.
Rights have been initiated in the
past for some particular purpose,
and the priority must be established
for that purpose. If right was
acquired for mining and irrigation
Dut no water used for irrigation for
number of years, the right for such
use should be denied. A change in
use from power or mining which
does not consume the water to that
or irrigation which consumes a large
part OF the supply, would materially
alfect conditions on the stream. A
valuable orchard below, the result of
many years labor may be ruined
from the effects of such change
Nothing could be gained by DESTROY
ing well developed farm, to en-
courage the cultivation of new
1arm by subsequent appropriation.
Such changes are clearly against
public policy, and should not be per-
mltted. Because water user has
enjoyed free grant from the public
Tor many years, is no reason why he
should be given preferred right TO
Inappropriate such water for a new
use, and perhaps to the injury of
others. The user has no property
rights in the water itself, but only
right for a particular use.
Period.
The period of use is likewise an
important element. A right acquired
FOR summer irrigation would not give
the owner right at some later
time to convey water through his
ditch for storage during the winter
months. This new use would take
subsequent date of priority. A
right for mining during the winter
.
tended to include summer use as of
the original priority. In theory
right acquired for the irrigation of
grain which natures early in the
season, and long used for such pur.
pose, cannot be enlarged to include
water for alfalfa, which requires a
greater amount, and at different
time than for the original use. Such
enlarged use may defeat, or serious.
~ impair other rights, to the extent
OF the enlargement.
Place.
The maximum limit of the use. and
the place of use are the important
elements so far as the public is con.
cerned. All water used in the state
for any and all uses, should be made
appurtenant to the place of use.
otherwise there can be no stability
to water titles, and the public rec
ords in the central Office will be of
but little value. At present only
water used for irrigation is made
appurtenant to the place of use.
No transfers of water from one
place of use to another without loss
of priority should be permitted ex-
cept in the most extreme cases and |
tnen only after proper proceedings |
and record before the Board of Con-
troll. In all uses more or less water |
returns to the stream, for the ben.
eft of lower appropriations. Where |
the use is transferred great distances
along the stream or to a point just |
outside the water shed, it Is clear |
that damage will result to intervening
ditch rights. The same damage may |
result from even relatively small |
displacement as the laws of under |
ground water cannot be ascertained |
with accuracy. Therefore any change |
In the place of use will in some de- |
gree affect lower rights. AS one of |
the prime objects of the law is to |
insure stability of water titles and |