| OCR Text |
Show 715 The State Land Commissioner, on his own initiative, may determine the rights of the various claimants, and is required to do so when petitioned by one or more water users if the circumstances justify it. Any State court in which an action is brought to determine such rights may trans- fer the action to the commissioner for determination. The Commis- sioner is authorized to make investigations, take testimony, and make findings of fact and an order of determination of the relative rights; and thereupon he is required to file the record in the superior court for a judicial determination of such rights. The court proceedings are com- parable to those of a suit in equity, culminating in a judgment of ad- judication affirming or modifying the order made by the commissioner. Administration of the Water Code and of the distribution of waters according to rights of use is vested in the State Land Commissioner, excepting distribution reserved to water commissioners appointed by the courts under decrees existing when the Water Code was enacted.23 Pro- vision is made for the creation by the commisioner of water districts when necessary, for the appointment, duties, and powers of water super- intendents for such districts, and for control structures at sources of supply.24 California California water law includes rights of use acquired by prior appro- priation, and rights inherent in the ownership of lands riparian to natural streams or lakes and lands overlying ground-water supplies. The riparian and overlying rights are paramount, but all water rights of whatever character are now limited by constitutional mandate to the reasonable beneficial use of water. The riparian doctrine is based upon the adoption of the common law in 1850, the year in which California was admitted to the Union.25 Important as the riparian doctrine eventually became, it had no effect upon the use of water for mining during the years immediately follow- ing the discovery of gold in 1848; for the mining lands were part of the public domain, and the miners (in many cases technically trespassers) simply followed the expedient course of making and enforcing their own rules governing claims to the use of water as well as mining claims. These customs and rules, based upon priority of possession, diligence in constructing works and putting water to use, and beneficial use of the water, varied from one mining camp to another but followed the same general pattern. As such, they were recognized by the courts as 28 Ariz. Code Ann. 1939, § 75-103. 24 Ariz. Code Ann. 1939, §§ 75-128 to 75-136. 25 Lux v. Haggin, 69 Calif. 255, 379-387, 10 Pac. 674 (1886). |
