OCR Text |
Show NEVADA 483 (2) Developed water.-This is water which is not a part of the watercourse, but is produced by individual labor and enterprise, and as such is the property of the person developing it.130 (3) Wastewater.-The Nevada Supreme Court has defined waste- water as surplus water running or seeping from irrigated ground which is not consumed by the irrigation process.131 So long as waste- water existe upon the land of the original user, it is his property,132 but the original owner can consent to its appropriation by others. However, the user of wastewater generated by an upland use does not acquire any vested right to have the wasteful practice continue for his benefit.133 In other words, a claimant's right to wastewater is temporary, and is not subject to appropriation so as to establish a permanent right thereto, and the court has stated that wastewater is not subject to appropriation under the statutory procedures.134 Where wastewater had been discharged by the original owner for the purpose of getting rid of it, a lease purporting to grant a right to use such water passed no interest, because the owner's right had been abandoned and he had no interest to lease.135 In disposing of his irrigation wastewater, the upper landowner must act in a rea- sonable manner so that his wastewater does not injure adjacent land- owners.136 (4) Return waters.-In a controversy which arose in Federal court over the waters of an interstate stream, it was determined that about two-thirds of the water from the upstream appropriator found its way back to the natural channel. The court ruled that the upper user was confined to the locality of his use at the time the down- stream appropriation was made, since the junior appropriator was entitled to have conditions exist substantially as they did at the time of his appropriation.187 3.5 Storage Waters, Artificial Lakes, and Ponds Water may be stored in Nevada for a beneficial purpose, released into any natural channel by the person entitled to the use thereof, and claimed below by him for beneficial use-subject to existing rights and with due allowance for channel losses.138 3.6 Sprmgs There is language in one early Nevada case which seems to sug- gest that a spring fed by percolating ground water was the property of the landowner upon whose land the spring was located.139 How- ever, it now appears clear that springs in Nevada are governed by the appropriation doctrine, regardless of their source of supply.140 130 Gardelli v. Oomatock Tunnel Oo., 26 Nev. 284, 66 Pac. 950 (1901). lslRyan v. Gallio, 52 Nev. 330, 286 Pac. 963 (1930). wBidleman v. Short, 38 Nev. 467, 150 Pac. 834 (1915). wRyan v. Gallio, 52 Nev. 330, 286 Pac. 963 (1930). is*In re Bassett Greek and Its Tributaries, 62 Nev. 461, 155 P. 2d 324 (1945). u*Bchulz v. Sweeny, 19 Nev. 359, 11 Pac. 253 (1886). ™Blaisdell v. Stephens, 14 Nev. 17 (1879). 1ST Vineyard Land & Stock Oo. v. Twin Falls Salmon River Land & Water Co., 245 Fed. 9 (CCA. 9th 1917). "» Nev. Rev. Stat., sec. 533.055. "»Hosier v. Oaldwell, 7 Nev. 363 (1872). wo jjev. Rev. Stat., sec. 533.025; In re Manse Spring and Its Tributaries, 60 Nev. 280, 108 P. 2d 311 (1940). 499-242-73------32 |