Opinion ID: 2589958
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: events precipitating the present dispute

Text: ¶ 13 In the spring of 1991, the state engineer sent a letter to SFPC indicating that if it could not provide evidence of a right to the water it diverted from the mine, legal action would ensue to prevent Silver Fork residents from diverting the water. On April 1, 1991, SFPC filed an underground water claim, or diligence claim, and a change application claiming that it owned title to the right to use approximately .5 c.f.s. of water intercepted in the mine. ¶ 14 On December 10, 1991, and June 22, 1992, Salt Lake filed with the engineer an Application for Temporary Change of Water, and an Application for Permanent Change of Water, respectively. These applications requested permission to change its point of diversion from one of its ditches near the mouth of the canyon to the portal of the mine. The engineer stayed any action on both SFPC's claim and Salt Lake's applications pending resolution of this dispute. ¶ 15 Since 1991, SFPC has continued to pay Salt Lake for the water it diverted from the mine pursuant to its agreement. Since that time, however, SFPC has paid Salt Lake under protest, claiming that it is the rightful owner of waters emanating from the mine.