Source: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1130745
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 10:40:03+00:00

Document:
576 THE APPROPRIATIVE RIGHT that when his needs have been supplied, he should leave the water in the stream to flow down to those next in priority676 or, if he does divert an excessive quantity, the excess must be returned to the stream.677 The Nebraska situation with respect to the return of unused water to the stream has been discussed earlier under "Elements of the Appropriative Right-Diversion of Water from Watershed." (4) It is held by the Utah Supreme Court that between the time of inception of an appropriative right and its full consummation, intermediate or interven- ing appropriators may acquire rights to use the water by appropriating it. This is but a temporary right and must give way to the rights of the prior appropriator when he has completed his appropriation and is ready to use the water.678 Reasonable Limitation of Senior Right From what has been said it is clear that the prior appropriator does not have an unlimited right to the use of water, but is subject to a reasonable limitation of his right for the benefit of junior appropriators. He may thus be limited to the quantity of water reasonably required to raise crops under reasonably efficient methods of applying water to the land-a result which a court of equity has inherent power to bring about. This judicial power of limitation is itself a limited power; it cannot be used to eliminate or modify established water rights.679 (See "Efficiency of Practices" in chapter 9.) The Utah Supreme Court held that at the discretion of the trial court, reasonable regulations may be imposed in a decree of adjudication upon the use of water by the parties.680 But, the supreme court cautioned in another case, the trial court should avoid making a regulation which has the potentiality of depriving prior appropriators of a substantial part of the quantity of water which it found that they are entitled to use.681 Maintenance of Stream Conditions (1) The junior appropriator initiates his right with notice of existing stream conditions and rights of diversion and use, and in the belief that the water previously appropriated by others will continue to be used as it is then being 676Fort Lyon Canal Co. v. Chew, 33 Colo. 392, 404-405, 81 Pac. 37 (1905); In re Hood River, 114 Oreg. 112, 188, 227 Pac. 1065 (1924). See Nev. Rev. Stat. § 533.060(1) (Supp. 1967). 6""Natoma Water & Min. Co. v. Hancock, 101 Cal. 42, 51-52, 31 Pac. 112 (1892), 35 Pac. 334 (1894); Gunnison In. Co. v. Gunnison Highland Canal Co., 52 Utah 347, 357, 174 Pac. 852 (1918). See Mont. Rev. Codes Ann. § 89-805 (1964). 678 Whitmore v. Murray City, 107 Utah 445, 451-452, 154 Pac. (2d) 748 (1944); Salt Lake City v. Salt Lake City Water & Elec. Power Co., 24 Utah 249, 266-267, 67 Pac. 672 (1902). 679In re Water Rights of Escalante Valley Drainage Area, 10 Utah (2d) 77, 82, 348 Pac. (2d) 679 (1960). 680McKean v. Lasson, 5 Utah (2d) 168, 173, 298 Pac. (2d) 827 (1956). 681McNaughton v. Eaton, 4 Utah (2d) 223, 225-226, 291 Pac. (2d) 886 (1955).

References: v. 
 § 533
 v. 
 v. 
 § 89
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.