| OCR Text |
Show 294 LOSS OF WATER RIGHTS IN WATERCOURSES forfeitures of water appropriations because of failure to make beneficial use of the water was sustained by the Nebraska Supreme Court.218 The procedure was validly applied to applications to appropriate water made before the enactment as well as after it.219 Nevada.-When an owner fails to use the water for the beneficial purposes for which the right exists for any 5 successive years, the right shall be deemed as having been abandoned and the owner shall forfeit all the water rights, easements, and privileges appurtenant thereto. Such unused water is again subject to appropriation.220 The Nevada Supreme Court approved the application of this statute to appropriative rights acquired after the enactment of this provision.221 New Mexico.- When the party entitled to the use of water fails to beneficially use all or any part of the water for the purpose for which the vested right was appropriated or adjudicated, for 4 years, such unused water shall, if the appropriator fails to beneficially use the water for 1 year after notice and declaration of nonuse given by the State Engineer, revert to the public and be regarded as unappropriated water.222 Upon a showing of reasonable cause for delay or nonuse or upon a finding by the State Engineer that it is in the public interest, the State Engineer is authorized to grant extensions of time, not to exceed 1 year for each extension, in which to apply the water to beneficial use. The forfeiture shall not occur for certain stated exceptions nor shall it necessarily occur if circumstances beyond the control of the owner caused the nonuse such that the water could not be diligently placed to beneficial use.223 A lawful exemption from the requirements of beneficial use, either by an extension of time or other statutory exemption, stops the running of the forfeiture period for the period of the exemption, and such period shall not be included in computing the forfeiture period.224 2l*State v. Birdwood In. Dist, 154 Nebr. 52, 56-57, 46 N.W. (2d) 884 (1951); Dawson County In. Co. v.McMullen, 120 Nebr. 245, 247-251, 231 N.W. 840 (1930). 219Kersenbrock v. Boyes, 95 Nebr. 407, 409-411, 145 N.W. 837 (1914); In re Birdwood Irr. Dist., Water Div. No. 1-A, 154 Nebr. 52, 46 N.W. (2<1) 884, 888 (1951). In addition to this statutory procedure for forfeiture of water rights, the Nebraska Supreme Court recognizes another method-nonuse for a time equal to the statutory limitation upon actions to recover the possession of real property (10 years). State v. Nielsen, 163 Nebr. 372, 381-382, 79 N.W. (2d) 721 (1956); Farmers' Irr. Dist. v. Frank, 72 Nebr. 136, 156, 100 N.W. 286 (1904). "°!Nev. Laws 1913, ch. 140, § 8, Rev. Stat. § 533.060(2) (Supp. 1967). 221 In re Manse Spring & Its Tributaries, 60 Nev. 280, 287, 288, 289-291, 108 Pac. (2d) 311(1940). 222See State ex rel Reynolds v. South Springs Co., 80 N. Mex. 144, 452 Pac. (2d) 478, 480-481 (1969). 223 In the latter regard, see W. S. Ranch Co. v. Kaiser Steel Corp., 79 N. Mex. 65, 439 Pac. (2d) 714, 717 (1968); State ex rel. Reynolds v. South Springs Co., 80 N. Mex. 144, 452 Pac. (2d) 478, 482(1969). 2MN. Mex. Stat. Ann. §75-5-26 (1968). |
