| OCR Text |
Show The State of Utah OFFICE OF STATE ENGINEER SALT LAKE CITY August 6, 1958 Mr. Charle3 E. Corker Deputy Attorney General 1095 Market Street - Rm. 302 San Francisco 3, California Dear Mr. Corker: Your letter of July 21 was received and we have assembled the information you requested. The dates requested have been typed in red on th<3 copies of Utah Exhibits 20-23 which are enclosed. I should again. call your attention to Utah laws which allow filing of "diligence claims" to the use of surface water if such use was made prior to 1903 as shown on Exhibit 20, and to the filing of underground water claims if the source was developed and put to use prior to 1935 as shown on Exhibit 21. In regards to certificated water rights, listed in Exhibits 22 and 23, under the law applicants may have as long as 50 years from the time of the approval of the application to fully develop their water right and make proof of use. However, the priority date, unless subsequently lapsed for failure to meet certain requirements of this office such as payment of fet:s, etc., is taken as the date of filing. Also, I should re-emphasize that these four exhibits do not reflect all rights in the basin. Many applications are on file in this office for which proof will be submitted within the legal time period and they will be considered as bonafide rights, some of which will have priorities in the early 1900's. In fact, one proof ha.3 been made on surface water within the Lower Colorado River drainage since Exhibit 22 was prepared in Au-list, VJ^T. Also, two surface water diligence claims that were not included in Exhibit 20 have been filed. for this reason, we are relyinr lar,r:ely on our jurvey of irrigated areas rai.lu.r Lhan our1 "rccorued ri rhts" as Gescribed above in our claims tc use oi' the waters of t'o Lo.»er Coloraan jiiver. Jincerely yours, irfaj'ne D. Griddle flDCt ja i2nclosures cc: i'lr. 11. Colli:>ter Ai.torney General. B u i 1 d i n g WAYNE D. CRIOOLC •tat* Cnbincc* |
| Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |
