OCR Text |
Show NEVADA 369 Special provisions supplement the general water rights statute with respect to rights for the watering of livestock, particularly range livestock. Subject to the protection of subsisting rights at watering places that utilize substantially all the readily available public range, livestock water rights may be acquired under the general procedure in which, however, a sufficient measure of the quantity of water is specification of the number and kinds of animals to be watered.31 This legislation obviously contemplates use of water in place, with no requirement that it be diverted from the spring or stream channel. Water may be appropriated by any corporation authorized to do business in the State; or by any person, United States citizen, or legally declared intended citizen, over 21 years of age.32 "Person" is defined as including a corporation, an association, the United States, and the State, as well as a natural person.33 The Nevada Supreme Court emphasized that no right is created by the mere diversion of water from a public watercourse. When the act of diverting the water is coupled with the act of applying it to a beneficial purpose, then the appropriation is accomplished and completed.34 In Nevada, construction work ordinarily must begin within 1 year from the date of the permit; it must be completed within 5 years, and application of water to beneficial use must be completed within 10 years. However, the State Engineer may grant extensions, on good cause shown.35 The principle of gradual or progressive development is also recognized. That is, the appropriator is not limited to the quantity of water or the acreage of land irrigated in the first year or so of his development, but he may develop his project gradually, within his reasonable means, if reasonable diligence is exercised. The object at the time of initiating the appropriation must be considered in connection with its actual extent.36 The principle of "relation back" of the date of priority to the first step taken to obtain the right was established early in the judicial history of water rights in Nevada. If the work of constructing facilities and diverting and using water is prosecuted with reasonable diligence, the date of priority of the right relates back to the time when the first step was taken to obtain was held not to be beneficial. Vineyard Land & Stock Co. v. Twin Falls Salmon River Land & Water Co., 245 Fed. 9, 21-22 (9th Cir. 1917). 31Nev. Laws 1925, ch. 201, Rev. Stat. § §533.485 to .510 (Supp. 1973). 32Nev. Rev. Stat. §533.325 (Supp. 1973). 33Id. §533.010. 3AProsole v. Steamboat Canal Co., 37 Nev. 154, 160, 161, 140 Pac. 720, 144 Pac. 744 (1914); Walsh v. Wallace, 26 Nev. 299, 327, 67 Pac. 914 (1902). 35Nev. Rev. Stat. §533.380(1973). See also §533.410, construed in State Engineer v. American Nat'l Ins. Co., 88 Nev. 424, 498 Pac. (2d) 1329 (1972), in which the supreme court indicated that the statutory directives in §533.410 did not affect the power of the district court to grant equitable relief to a permittee when warranted. 36Barnes v. Sabron, 10 Nev. 217, 239-240, 244 (1875); Rickey Land & Cattle Co. v. Miller & Lux, 152 Fed. 11, 18 (9th Cir. 1907). |