Corbridge, Jr., James N.

English

Corbridge, James N., Jr.

bepress Legal Repository

Application of the Law of Prior Appropriation: Outline

Colorado Law

University of Colorado Law School Colorado Law Scholarly Commons Water Resources Allocation: Laws and Emerging Issues: A Short Course (Summer Conference, June 8-11) 1981 6-8-1981 Application of the Law of Prior Appropriation: Outline James N. Corbridge, Jr. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/water-resources-allocation-laws-and-emerging-issues  Part of the Agriculture Law Commons, Animal Law Commons, Contracts Commons, Dispute Resolution and Arbitration Commons, Energy and Utilities Law Commons, Environmental Law Commons, Indian and Aboriginal Law Commons, Legislation Commons, Litigation Commons, Natural Resources and Conservation Commons, Natural Resources Law Commons, Natural Resources Management and Policy Commons, Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Commons, Property Law and Real Estate Commons, Recreation, Parks and Tourism Administration Commons, State and Local Government Law Commons, Urban Studies Commons, Water Law Commons, and the Water Resource Management Commons Citation Information Corbridge, Jr., James N., "Application of the Law of Prior Appropriation: Outline" (1981). Water Resources Allocation: Laws and Emerging Issues: A Short Course (Summer Conference, June 8-11). 4. https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/water-resources-allocation-laws-and-emerging-issues/4 Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School.     James N. Corbridge, Jr., Application of the Law of Prior Appropriation: Outline, in WATER RESOURCES ALLOCATION: LAWS AND EMERGING ISSUES (Natural Res. Law Ctr., Univ. of Colo. Sch. of Law 1981).  Reproduced with permission of the Getches-Wilkinson Center for Natural Resources, Energy, and the Environment (formerly the Natural Resources Law Center) at the University of Colorado Law School.  _OUTLINEAPPLICATION OF THE LAW OFPRIOR APPROPRIATIONBYJAMES N. CORBRIDGE, JR.PROFESSOR OF LAWUNIVERSITY OF COLORADOWATER RESOURCES ALLOCATION:LAWS AND EMERGING ISSUESTHE UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO SCHOOL OF LAWra`I. DIRECT FLOW RIGHTSA. Acquisition of a right1. Substantive requirementsa. Intent to appropriate; diversion; application to abeneficial use; without waste(1) Intent -- physical activity manifesting theintent; Four Counties Water Users Ass e rt v.Colorado River Water Conservation District,161 Colo. 416, 425 P.2d 259 (1967)(2) The need for a diversion- Town of Genoa v. Westfall, 141 Colo. 533,349 P.2d 370 (1960)- minimum stream flows and instream appro-priations- Colorado River Water Conservation District v. Colorado Water Conservation Board, 197Colo. 469, 594 P.2d 570 (1979); McClellanv. Jantzen, 26 Ariz. App. 223, 547 P.2d494 (1976); State Dept. of Parks v. IdahoDept. of Water Administration, 96 Ida.440, 530 P.2d 924 (1974)(3) Beneficial use; hostility to speculation;Colorado River Water Conservation District v. Vidler Tunnel Water Co., 197 Colo. 413,594 P.2d 566 (1979); Gossner v. Utah Power & Light,	 Ut.	 ,612 P.2d 337 (1980)C.R.S. 1973, g37-92-103(4):Cl"Beneficial use" is the use of that amountof water that is reasonable and appropriateunder reasonably efficient practices to accom-plish without waste the purpose for which theappropriation is lawfully made and, withoutlimiting the generality of the foregoing,includes the impoundment of water for recre-ational purposes, including fishery or wild-life. For the benefit and enjoyment ofpresent and future generations, "beneficialuse" shall also include the appropriationby the state of Colorado in the manner pre-scribed by law of such minimum flows betweenspecific points or levels for and on naturalstreams and lakes as are required to preservethe natural environment to a reasonable degree.b. Waters subject to appropriation(1) All waters(2) Stream waters(3) Natural streams(4) Ground water vs. surface water(5) Tributary v. non-tributary- tributary presumption- the "global" concept of the natural stream- Safranek v. Limon, 123 Colo. 330, 228 P.2d975 (1951)C22. Procedural requirementsa. Permit states(1) Montana: Mont. Rev. Codes Ann. 1189-865 etsea. (Supp. 1973), as amended.- Application to Department of Natural Resourcesand Conservation- Notice and objectives; public hearings- Completion of appropriation; certificate ofwater right- Restrictions on permits- Reservation of water: the public interestb. Colorado(1) Decreed right(a) Water Right Determination and AdjudicationAct of 1969, C.R.S. 1973, 137-92-101 et 2n..(b) The water clerk, referee and water judge- jurisdiction over "water matters"(c) Application for a water right- forms provided by water court- resume (monthly)- statement of opposition- referee's determination- protest- hearings by water judge- appeals (to Colorado Supreme Court),- postponement doctrine -- C.R.S. 1973,§37-92-306C3(d) Injury to vested rights not at issue inapplication for a surface water right;administration is adequate(2) The conditional decree(a) The need for such a decree- transmountain diversions- the "great and growing cities" doctrine- "reasonable" diligence- thepostponement doctrine- no need for aoplication to a beneficialuse until decree finalized(b) Initiating the decree- application under 1969 Act- Bunger v. Uncompahgre Valley Water Users Ass'n, 192 Colo. 159, 557 P.2d389 (1976)- Four Counties Water Users Ass'n v.Colorado River Water Conservation Dist.,161 Colo. 416, 425 P.2d 259 (1967)(c) Due diligence- C.R.S. 1973, §37-92-103(1); C.R.S. 1973,§37-92-301(4); every fourth calendaryear-z Denver v. Northern Colorado Water Con-servancy Dist., 130 Colo. 375, 276 P.2d992 (1954)(Blue River); Metropolitan Suburban Water Users Ass'n v. Colorado River Water Conservation Dist., 148 Colo.173, 365 P.2d 273 (1961) (Metro);C4Four Counties Water Users Ass'n v. Colo-rado River Water Conservation Dist., 159Colo. 499, 414 P.2d 469 (1966); Colo-rado River Water Conservation Dist. v. Twin Lakes Reservoir & Canal Co., 181Colo. 53, 506 P.2d 1226 (1973); Town of DeBeque v. Enewold,	 Colo.606 P.2d 48 (1980); Simineo v. Kelling,Colo.	 , 607 P.2d 1289 (1980).- Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation v. Intake Water Co.,171 Mont. 416, 558 P.2d 1110 (1977)(3) Plan for augmentation(a) Defined -- C.R.S. 1973, B37-92-103(9)(as amended):"Plan for augmentation" means a detailedprogram to increase the supply of wateravailable for beneficial use in a divi-sion or portion thereof by the develop-ment of new or alternate means or pointsof diversion, by a pooling of water re-sources, by water exchange projects, byproviding substitute supplies of water,by the development of new sources of water,or by any other appropriate means. "Planfor augmentation" does not include thesalvage of tributary waters by the eradi-cation of phreatophytes, nor does itC5include the use of tributary water collec-ted from land surfaces which have beenmade impermeable, thereby increasing therunoff but not adding to the existingsupply of tributary water.(b) No injury to vested water rights or de-creed conditional water rights; C.R.S.1973, §37-92-305(3)(c) Terms and conditions to prevent injury;C.R.S. 1973,m§37-92-305(4)(d) Special standards; C.R.S. 1973, §37-92-305(8) (added 1977)(e) Case law: Cache LaPoudre Water Users Ass'n v. Glacier View Meadows, 191 Colo.53, 550 P.2d 288 (1976); Kelly Ranch v.Southeastern Colo. Water Conservancy Dist.,191 Colo. 65, 550 P.2d 297 (1976)3. Substance of the water right- one use; not re-use- enforcement of priority- put a call on the river, as long as not a "futile"call; C.R.S. 1973, §37-92-102(2)(d); Gilbert v. Smith,97 Ida. 735, 552 P.2d 1220 (1976)- protected as both senior and junior appropriator- not overflow irrigation- quantity of water -- decree or historic use, whicheverwas less- exchanges; C.R.S. 1973, §37-83-101 et seq.CoB. Transfer problems1. Protection of junior appropriators; the junior is en-titled to stream conditions as he finds them when hemakes his appropriation; Green v. Chaffee Ditch Co.,150 Colo. 91, 371 P.2d 775 (1962); Farmers Highline Canal & Reservoir Co. v. City of Golden, 129 Colo.575, 272 P.2d 629 (1954); Enlarged Bouthside IrrigationDitch Co. v. Johns Flood Ditch Co., 120 Colo. 423,210 P.2d 982 (1949); Honey Boy Haven, Inc. v. Roybal,92 N.M. 603, 592 P.2d 959 (1978); Huff v. Bretz, 285Or. 507, 592 P.2d 204 (1978); Basin Electric Power Coop. v. State Board of Control, 	 Wyo.	 ,578P.2d 557 (1978); Thompson v. Harvey, 164 Mont. 133,519 P.2d 963 (1974).2. 1969 change of water right; C.R.S. 1973, §37-92-103(5):"Change of water right" means a change in the type,place, or time of use, a change in the point of diver-sion, a change from a fixed point of diversion to alter-nate or supplemental points of diversion, a change fromalternate or supplemental points of diversion to afixed point of diversion, a change in the means of di-version, a change in the Place of storage, a change fromdirect application to storage and subsequent applica-tion, a change from storage and subsequent applicationto direct application, a change from a fixed place ofstorage to alternate places of storage, a change fromalternate places of storage to a fixed place of storage,or any combination of such changes. The term "change"Clof water right" includes changes of conditional waterrights as well as changes of water rights.3. Method of protection -- reduction of decreed amounts;replacement waterC. Some variations1. Change in point of return; Metropolitan Denver Sewage Disposal Dist. No. 1 v. Farmers Reservoir & Irr. Co.,179 Colo. 36, 499 P.2d 1190 (1972); City of Boulder v. Boulder & Left Hand Ditch Co., 192 Colo. 219, 557P.2d 1182 (1976)2. The "silty" water debate- A-B Cattle Co. v. United States, 196 Colo. 539, 589P.2d 57 (1979)- but see Game and Fish Comm'n v. Farmers Irr. Co.,162 Colo. 301, 426 P.2d 562 (1967); juniors protec-ted against pollution3. The seepage appropriator- not entitled to the continuation of the seepage- Lamont v. Riverside Err. District, 179 Colo. 134,498 P.2d 1150 (1972)4. Recapture rights- distinguish from re-use- global concept- recapture tightly limited; Fort Morgan Reservoir & Irrigation Co. v. McCune, 71 Colo. 256, 206 P. 393(1922)5. Lining of ditches -- who has the right to the "saved"water, if any?Cs- Salt River Valley Water Users Ass'n v. Kovacovich,3 Ariz.	 App. 28, 411 P.2d 201 (1966)D. Other "types" of water1. Developed watera. Definition: would not have been in a stream systembut for efforts of developer; "foreign" waterb. Special privileges -- re-use, successive use, rightto dispose of; not subject to call on the riverc. Loss of dominiond. Cases: Pikes Peak Golf Club v. Kuiper, 169 Colo.309, 455 P.2d 882 (1969); City and County of Denverv. Fulton Irrigating Ditch Co., 179 Colo. 47, 506P.2d 144 (1972); Thayer v. City of Rawlins,	 Wyo., 594 P.2d 951 (1979)2. Salvaged watera. Definition: would have been in stream, is lost,then recoveredb. Is subject to call on the riverc. The phreatophyte problem: Southeastern Colo. WaterConservancy Dist. v. Shelton Farms, Inc., 187 Colo.181, 529 P.2d 1321 (1974)E. Loss of a water right1. Abandonment- distinguished from "never put to beneficial use"- distinguished from forfeiture- intent to abandon required; mere non-user said to beinsufficientC9- ten-year rebuttable presumption; C.R.S. 1973,§37-92-402(11) (as amended)- Gardner v. State of Colorado,	 Cob., 614P.2d 357 (1980)2. Forfeiture- Wyo. Stat. Ann. g §41-47 to -53 (1957); Ward v. Yoder,355 P.2d 371, rehearing denied, 357 P.2d 180 (Wyo.1960)- Utah Code Ann. §73-1-4 (1980); Hammond v. Johnson, 94Ut. 20, 66 P.2d 894 (1937)3. PrescriptionII. STORAGE RIGHTSA. Integration with direct flow rights- quantity -- acre feet- rate and time of filling -- the reservoir's "priority"B. Off-stream reservoirs1. Filled to gauge height2. Handling of evaporation lossesC. In-channel reservoirs1. Solving the priority problem; inflow and outflowmeasurement2. Handling of evaporation lossesD. The "one filling" rule- Windsor Reservoir and Canal Co. v. Lake Supply Ditch Co.,44 Colo. 214, 98 P. 729 (1908)- Denver v. Northern Colorado Water Conservancy Dist.,130 Colo. 375, 276 P.2d 992 (1954); one filling ruleplus pioneer ruleC10

https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1003&context=water-resources-allocation-laws-and-emerging-issues

Application of the Law of Prior Appropriation: Outline

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

bepress Legal Repository

Colorado Law