Source: https://collections.lib.utah.edu/details?id=1130428
Timestamp: 2019-04-24 04:45:27+00:00

Document:
THE LAND FACTOR IN APPROPRIATING WATER 259 State Lands Appropriation of water by State for use of State lands. -The power of the legislature of a State to authorize, either expressly or by implication, the State government or any of its agencies to appropriate water for proper purposes is no more debatable than its power to authorize individuals to do so. This is mentioned earlier under "Who May Appropriate Water." The instrumentality used in making water available for specific State lands, or for such lands in general-whether grant or appropriation, or as to permissible method of appropriation-is within the discretion of the law-making body. Appropriation by others in relation to State lands. -In addition to what the State chooses to do in making unappropriated water available for use of its own lands, there is some legislation concerning appropriations by others in relation to State lands. Thus the State of California, by enactment of the Civil Code,174 is held by its supreme court to have consented to the taking, by an appropriator pursuant to the code procedure, of the water of any stream in which the State held riparian rights, by virtue of its ownership of land contiguous to such streams, at the time of such appropriation. Appropriators under the Civil Code thereby acquired rights superior to the riparian rights of lands owned by the State on the same stream when the appropriations were made before the riparian lands passed into private ownership. But the riparian rights of lands acquired from the State are superior to appropriative rights of lands on the same stream which were acquired after the riparian lands passed into private ownership because, although the State might have reserved from its grants of land the waters flowing through them for the benefit of subsequent appropriators, it had not done so. Section 1422, which provided that the rights of riparian owners should not be affected by the provisions of the statute, saved and protected the rights of grantees who acquired land from the State before proceedings to appropriate water under the code provisions were initiated.175 102 Pac. 728 (1909); Caviness v. La Grande In. Co., 60 Ureg. 410, 424, 119 Pac. 731 (1911); Davis v. Chamberlain, 51 Oreg. 304, 315, 98 Pac. 154 (1908); Laurance v. Brown, 94 Oreg. 387, 395, 185 Pac. 761 (1919). Some Federal court decisions: Krall v. United States, 79 Fed. 241, 242-243 (9th Cir. 1897), appeal dismissed, 174 U. S. 385, 389-391 (1899);/4/mo Water Co. v. Jones, 39 Fed. (2d) 37, 38-39 (9th Cir. 1930); United States v. Walker River In. Dist., 104 Fed. (2d) 334, 336-337, 339-340 (9th Cir. 1939). Some United States Supreme Court decisions: Atchison v. Peterson, 87 U. S. 507 (1874); Basey v. Gallagher, 87 U. S. 670 (1875); Sturr v. Beck, 133 U. S. 541, 550-551 (1890); United States v. Rio Grande Dam & In. Co., 174 U. S. 690, 703-710 (1899); Gutierres v. Albuquerque Land & In. Co., 188 U. S. 545, 552-556 (l903);San Jose Land & Water Co.v. San Jose Ranch Co., 189 U. S. 177, 183-184 (1903). See Forbes v. Gracey, 94 U. S. 762, 766-767 (1877). 174Cal. Civ. Code § § 1410-1422 (1872). 175Lux v. Haggin, 69 Cal. 255, 368-376, 4 Pac. 919 (1884), 10 Pac. 674 (1886). See also Antioch v. Williams In. Dist., 188 Cal. 451, 463, 205 Pac. 688 (1922); Palmer v.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 1410
 v. 
 v.