Court Opinion

ID: 9529202
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 03:48:46.545823+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:27:42.426085
License: Public Domain

CROCKETT, Justice
(concurring).
I concur in placing approval upon the action of the State Engineer in allowing the change of place of diversion. Under the findings of the trial court it appears that 9.33 c. f. s. is the quantity of water which was completely used up through evaporation, plant consumption and transpiration under the former usage. Therefore, this quantity of water never did get down to the plaintiff lower users by return flow to the stream or otherwise. Retaining it in the Deer Creek Reservoir and diverting it through the conduit down to Utah and Salt Lake Valleys does not adversely affect plaintiffs nor diminish the quantity of water they should get.