OCR Text |
Show 374 SUMMARIES OF THE STATE WATER RIGHTS SYSTEMS appropriated water to place of use, there is a proviso that if for any reason it should become impracticable to use the water beneficially or economically at the place to which it is appurtenant, the right may be severed from such place and simultaneously transferred therefrom, in the manner provided in the statutes, and become appurtenant to another place or places of use without losing priority of right.69 Procedure for making changes in place of diversion, manner of use, or place of use of water already appropriated is included in the procedural sections governing the acquisition of appropriative rights through the State Engineer's office. The first step is applying to the State Engineer for a permit to make the change; the last is issuing of a certificate authorizing the change.70 The State Engineer's duties with respect to approval and rejection of applications for changes in exercise of water rights are the same as those governing applications to appropriate water. The Nevada Supreme Court pointed out that in the statute there is a positive admonition to the State Engineer not to permit a change if the proposal tends to impair the value of existing rights or to be otherwise detrimental to the public welfare.71 The right to make changes in exercise of appropriative rights has been long recognized by the courts, provided in all cases that the change works no injury to other rights.72 And the rule with respect to changing the point of diversion-if it can be done without injury to others-applies also to the means used in making the diversion.73 An appropriative water right may be lost in the following ways: (1) Abandonment. This is a voluntary matter, a question of intent, to be evi- denced by overt acts. Although mere lapse of time does not of itself constitute an abandonment, in determining questions of intent courts may take into con- sideration nonuse of water and other pertinent circumstances.74 The abandoned waters revert to the State and become subject to further appropriation.75 69Nev. Rev. Stat. §533.040 (Supp. 1973). As noted at the beginning of this subtopic, these provisions do not apply to cases in which water companies have appropriated water for sale to consumers. 10 Id. § §533.325 to .435. See particularly § §533.325, .345, and .425. 71 Kent v. Smith, 62 Nev. 30, 3940, 140 Pac. (2d) 357 (1943). 12Smith v. Logan, 18 Nev. 149, 154, 1 Pac. 678 (1883); Union Mill & Min. Co. v. Dangberg, 81 Fed. 73, 115 (C.C.D. Nev. 1897);Miller & Lux v. Rickey, 127 Fed. 573, 584 (C.C.D. Nev. 1904); Twaddle v. Winters, 29 Nev. 88, 103, 85 Pac. 280 (1906), 89 Pac. 289 (1907); Vineyard Land & Stock Co. v. Twin Falls Salmon River Land & Water Co., 245 Fed. 9, 28 (9th Cir. 1917). 13Miller & Lux v. Rickey, 127 Fed. 573, 584 (C.C.D. Nev. 1904). 74 See In re Manse Spring & Its Tributaries, 60 Nev. 280, 286-287, 289, 290, 108 Pac. (2d) 311 (1940); Anderson Land & Stock Co. \.McConnell, 188 Fed. 818, 823 (C.C.D. Nev. 1910); Valcalda v. Silver Peak Mines, 86 Fed. 90, 95 (9th Cir. 1898); Schuh v. Sweeny, 19 Nev. 359, 361, 11 Pac. 253 (1886); Franktown Creek In. Co. v. Marlette Lake Co., 11 Nev. 348, 364 Pac. (2d) 1069, 1072 (1961). ni Franktown Creek Irr. Co. v.Marlette Lake Co., 11 Nev. 348, 364 Pac. (2d) 1069, 1072 (1961). |