| OCR Text |
Show UTAH 751 water, the court announced it subscribed to the rule that "the use of water must not only be beneficial to the lands of the appropriators, but it must also be reasonable in relation to the reasonable requirements of subsequent appro- priators * ? *."414 With respect to new appropriations.-Where the evidence indicates that de- velopment work on an unappropriated spring area developed the flow, a new application will be allowed if it appears the appropriation can be accomplished without interfering with existing rights.415 An applicant is entitled to have his application approved for wells near a fully appropriated surface stream where the evidence shows that the underflow or carrier water does not reach the surface for existing beneficial uses; and where pump tests of the wells demonstrate that the stream produces more water with the wells on than with them off.416 Early Decisions Relating to Ground Water Under current appropriation procedures in Utah, the only classification of ground water of importance is that noted above in the 1949 Riordan case. However, for purposes of determining rights to ground water acquired prior to the complete adoption of the appropriation doctrine, these waters were classi- fied as (1) defined underground streams, or (2) percolating waters. Subterranean Watercourses Definite underground stream. -Waters flowing in definite underground streams in Utah consistently have been held to be subject to appropriation to the same extent as those flowing in surface streams.417 Underflow of surface stream. -In an early case, the Utah court recognized the appropriability of stream underflow in these words: It is a matter of common knowledge that in this arid region the mountain streams generally have what is known as an "underflow," that is, the water sinks and flows slowly throught the rocks, gravel, and sand which form the bed of the stream. This subsurface flow in a known and well-defined channel constitutes a part of the stream, and is subject to the rights of appropriation the same as the surface flow.418 Percolating Waters Announcement of the rule of absolute ownership. -In a number of early 414 348 Pac. (2d)at682. AlsBullock v. Tracy, 4 Utah (2d) 370, 294 Pac. (2d) 707 (1956); Dalton v. Wadley, 11 Utah (2d) 84, 355 Pac. (2d) 69 (1960). "*Little Cottonwood Water Co. v. Sandy City, 123 Utah 242, 258 Pac. (2d) 440 (1953). ""Chandler v. Utah Copper Co., 43 Utah 479, 135 Pac. 106 (1913). 419Howcroft v. Union & Jordan In. Co., 25 Utah 311, 316, 71 Pac. 487 (1903). |
