OCR Text |
Show 769 water taken from land on the public domain is subject to appropriation, whether it is percolating or stream water;861 then the rule of correla- tive rights as between owners of land overlying a common artesian basin;S62 and finally the doctrine of appropriation of artesian water.363 In 1935 the legislature amended the statute relating to the appropria- tion of water in order to bring the acquisition and administration of rights to the use of all ground waters under the State Engineer,364 and at subsequent sessions has further amended and enlarged the applicable sections of the law. Rights to the use of any unappropriated ground waters may be acquired only as provided by the statute, the first step being the making of an application to the State Engineer, as in case of appropriations from surface supplies. Claimants of rights are required to file notice of their claims with the State Engineer.365 The right of replacement of water may be exercised by a junior appropriator of ground water where the appropriation may diminish the quantity or impair the quality of ground water already appropriated.866 The State Engineer may hold hearings to determine if ground waters are inade- quate for existing claims, a supply found to be inadequate to be divided in accordance with the respective rights of the claimants.367 The State Engineer is authorized to plug, repair, or otherwise control artesian wells that are wasting public water.368 In 1949 the Utah Supreme Court had for consideration a proposal to appropriate water from a small spring area on private land, which water was said to be widely diffused through the soil through which it slowly percolated, the course of which could not be traced to any lands other than those on which the water was found, and which in its natural state produced plant life and thereby beneficially affected the land.369 Such water, said the court, is percolating water, a part of the m Sullivan v. Northern Spy Min. Co., 11 Utah 438, 441, 40 Pac. 709 (1895); Crescent Min. Co. v. Silver King Min. Co., 17 Utah 444, 451, 54 Pac. 244 (1898) j Willow Creek Irr. Co. v. Michaelson, 21 Utah 248, 254, 257, 60 Pac. 943 (1900); Herriman Irr. Co. v. Keel, 25 Utah 96, 109-110, 69 Pac. 719 (1902); Gams v. Rollins, 41 Utah 260, 265-266, 125 Pac. 867 (1912); Stookey v. Green, 53 Utah 311, 317-318, 178 Pac. 586 (1919); Holman v. Christensen, 73 Utah 389, 395, 274 Pac. 457 (1929). ^Horne v. Utah Oil Refining Co., 59 Utah 279, 301-305, 202 Pac. 815 (1921); Glover v. Utah Oil Refining Co., 62 Utah 174, 177-181, 218 Pac. 955 (1923); Utah Copper Co. v. Stephen Hayes Estate, 83 Utah 545, 555-556, 31 Pac. (2d) 624 (1934). 868 Wrathall v. Johnson, 86 Utah 50, 103-106, 126-127, 40 Pac. (2d) 755 (1935); Justesen v. Olsen, 86 Utah 158, 170-172, 176-177, 40 Pac. (2d) 802 (1935); Hanson v. Salt Lake City, - Utah -, 205 Pac. (2d) 255, 258 (1949). •"Utah Laws 1935, ch. 105. 885 Utah Code Ann., 1949 Cum. Supp., §§ 100-5-12 and 100-5-13. 886 Utah Code Ann., 1943, § 100-3-23. 847 Utah Code Ann., 1943, § 100-5-1. 164 Utah Laws 1945, ch. 136; Code Ann., 1949 Cum. Supp., § 100-2-21. "*Riordanv. Westwood, - Utah -, 203 Pac. (2d) 922,929-930 (1949). |