Opinion ID: 2566838
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Factual Findings Regarding BCWDC's Water Use

Text: ¶ 33 PPOC's first argument necessitates a review of the trial court's factual findings. Water forfeiture rulings generally depend heavily on questions of fact (e.g., whether and how much water was diverted and when, where, and to what end the diverted water was used). We will reverse the trial court's findings of fact only if they are clearly erroneous. Utah R. Civ. P. 52(a) (Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.). Factual findings are clearly erroneous if they are not adequately supported by the record, resolving all disputes in the evidence in a light most favorable to the trial court's determination. State v. Pena, 869 P.2d 932, 935-36 (Utah 1994). In addition, because the trial judge actually visited BCWDC's property to put the evidence in perspective, we are particularly reticent to second-guess his factual findings. See In re Escalante Valley Drainage Area, 11 Utah 2d 77, 355 P.2d 64, 66 (1960). ¶ 34 PPOC disputes the trial court's factual finding that BCWDC actively used its water for irrigation throughout the forfeiture period, arguing that [i]n this case the evidence shows that BCWDC, having failed in its efforts to grow trees, simply let the water run over the ground. At trial, PPOC offered evidence that BCWDC failed in creating and maintaining an active system of diversions and ditches for irrigation. Two individuals who resided in the Pinecrest area during the alleged forfeiture period testified that they did not see diversion works suitable for irrigation on the property. One of the residents testified that he saw a small hand-dug ditch that meandered around the property, but that the ditch contained no water. PPOC's expert witnesses, who examined the property in 1989, likewise testified that they saw no maintained system of irrigation, although one expert testified that he observed randomly placed hand-dug ditches in a state of disrepair. ¶ 35 In contrast, Walsh testified that he managed multiple diversion points and check dams, directing water through a planned system of ditches. He also testified that he planted and transplanted vegetation along the irrigated areas, and otherwise did not fail to use the water for any five-year continuous period. A witness who visited the property in 1996 testified that she saw places of irrigation and ditches around which the plants were more lush. In addition, the official from the office of the state engineer who inspected the property in 1982 testified that he saw established diversion works on the property at that time. ¶ 36 After considering all evidence, the trial judge ruled in favor of BCWDC, finding that the evidence shows that BCWDC has used the water during the time period in question. While the trial judge found that the tree farm was not ultimately successful, he concluded that, through Walsh's irrigation efforts, the water at issue satisfied aesthetic desires, encouraged indigenous plants to proliferate, reduced fire hazard, and created property line buffers. ¶ 37 In prosecuting its forfeiture claim, PPOC accepted the burden of producing clear and convincing evidence of forfeiture. [3] With this burden in mind, we find that the trial court's factual findings are adequately supported by the record. Our review does not lead us to a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made. Sweeney Land Co. v. Kimball, 786 P.2d 760, 761 (Utah 1990) (`[W]e do not set aside the trial court's factual findings unless they are against the clear weight of the evidence or we otherwise reach a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.' (quoting W. Kane County Special Serv. Dist. No. 1 v. Jackson Cattle Co., 744 P.2d 1376, 1377 (Utah 1987))). We therefore uphold the trial court's finding that BCWDC actively used the water with no intervening five-year period of non-use.