Source: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1130200
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 20:41:54+00:00

Document:
ELEMENTS OF WATERCOURSE 31 sometimes spoken of as a current.16 The streamflow is also referred to as a living stream,17 and as a running stream.18 Necessarily, the current is running water, though it need not run continuously.19 Definite and Substantial Existence Definite stream.-There must be a definite stream,20 the existence of which must be well defined.21 In a leading case, the South Dakota Supreme Court held that water that ran at intervals down a coulee did not have the characteristics of a definite running stream, which means the presence or existence of running water, running down a fixed channel, with some permanent source of supply.22 The court admitted that a river might run dry in a dry season without losing its character as a river, but insisted that it must be something more than just a wash or runoff caused by melting snow or a heavy rain. (The treatment of source of supply in this case is discussed below under "Source of Supply.") Indications of existence.-To meet the requirement that the stream shall have a substantial existence,23 there must be substantial indications of that fact.24 The Kansas Supreme Court held that prior to the occurrence of a particular flood there was water in a depression only in wet weather, leaving no impress of permanent running water; but that since the flood there had been a regular channel with a flow of water so steady and persistent as to show that the stream then had a well-defined and substantial existence.25 Under such circumstances, the short life of the watercourse was no bar to its classification as such. Therefore, visible evidence of the flow of water, either regular or at least occasional, is required.26 In a Wyoming case, seepage from irrigated land that 16Hoefs v. Short, 114 Tex. 501, 507, 273 S. W. 785 (1925). Current, or flow, one of the essential elements of a watercourse, is stressed in many court decisions: De Ruwe v. Morrison, 28 Wash. (2d) 797, 810, 184 Pac. (2d) 273 (1947). "Meine v. Ferris, 126 Mont. 210, 212, 247 Pac. (2d) 195 (1952). 18Costello v. Bowen, 80 Cal. App. (2d) 621, 627, 182 Pac. (2d) 615 (1947);Denver, Texas & Fort Worth R.R. v. Dotson, 20 Colo. 304, 305-306, 38 Pac. 322 (1894); Benson v. Cook, 47 S. Dak. 611, 616, 201 N. W. 526 (1924). l9Maricopa County M.W.C. Dist. v. Southwest Cotton Co., 39 Ariz. 65, 85-86, 4 Pac. (2d) 369(1931). m Terry v.Heppner, 59 S. Dak. 317, 319-320, 239 N. W. 759 (1931). 21 Cooper v. Sanitary Dist. No. 1 of Lancaster County, 146 Nebr. 412, 419,19 N. W. (2d) 619 (1945); Allison v. Linn, 139 Wash. 474, 477-478, 247 Pac. 731 (1926). "Benson v. Cook, 47 S. Dak. 611, 615-616, 201 N. W. 526 (1924). 83Barnes v. Sabron, 10 Nev. 217, 237 (1875); Shively v. Hume, 10 Oreg. 76, 77 (1881); Sierra County v. Nevada County, 155 Cal. 1, 8, 99 Pac. 371 (1908); Tierney v. Yakima County, 136 Wash. 481, 484, 239 Pac. 248 (1925); St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Carroll, 106 S. W. (2d) 757, 758 (Tex. Civ. App. 1937, error dismissed); Mader v. Mettenbrink, 159 Nebr. 118, 127, 65 N. W. (2d) 334 (1954). "Hutchinson v. Watson Slough Ditch Co., 16 Idaho 484, 488, 101 Pac. 1059 (1909); Doney v. Beatty, 124 Mont. 41, 51, 220 Pac. (2d) 77 (1950). 2SRait v. Furrow, 74 Kans. 101,105-106, 85 Pac. 934 (1906). "N. Mex. Stat. Ann. § 75-1-1 (1968).

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 75