OCR Text |
Show WHO MAY APPROPRIATE WATER 243 cooperative organization originally preferred by the United States Reclamation Service (now Bureau of Reclamation) in its dealings with water uses on the Federal Reclamation projects. It was one form of the mutual irrigation company. The mutual company organization in its incorporated character is of significant importance in various parts of the West, notably Utah, southern California, and eastern Colorado. It is also found unincorporated in many places. A few statutes list "partnership" and "firm." (3) Public districts. The only current water appropriation statutes that expressly refer to "irrigation district" are Oregon and Washington.95 However, this important organization is covered in the all-inclusive language of other statutes. Examples may be cited of two States in which the district form of organization is widely used for distributing water to great aggregate acreages of irrigated land. Thus in California, the irrigation district and the many other kinds of public water districts are included in the statute under the phrase "any entity or organization capable of holding an interest in real property in this State."96 Texas includes its water improvement district and water control and improvement district-successors of the irrigation district-and other districts and extensive water authorities in the category "political subdivision of the State."97 Riparian Proprietor In the few Western States in which supreme courts have expressed opinions as to whether an owner of riparian land may successfully claim water rights both as a riparian owner and as an appropriator for the service of such land, a majority hold in the affirmative. That is to say, the landowner may be possessed of both riparian and appropriative rights for use on the same tract of land. In Oregon, on the contrary, it is held that for the purpose of the instant proceeding, election of either claim constitutes abandonment of the other. Views on this question have been expressed in the several high courts as follows. California. -"It is established in California that a person may be possessed of rights to the use of the waters of a stream both because of the riparian character of the land owned by him and also as an appropriator."98 Under some circumstances it might be advantageous for such a riparian proprietor to exercise his riparian rather than his appropriative right-for example, if the appropriative right had been acquired after most of the riparian lands on the stream had passed into private ownership, and if the irrigation demands of other riparian owners were considerable. Or an appropriation of winter floodflow. for storage might provide the riparian owner with water late in the 95Oreg. Rev. Stat. § 537.410 (Supp. 1969); Wash. Rev. Code § 90.03.250 (Supp. 1961). 96Cal. Water Code § § 1252 (West Supp. 1970) and 1252.5 (West 1956). 97Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 7942 (1954). "Rindge v. Crags Land Co., 56 Cal. App. 247, 252, 205 Pac. 36 (1922). |