BOARD02257

• Board Meeting Date: 3/13/1963
• Description: Table of Contents, Agenda and Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

J~~O

MR. STAPLETON:

MR. MOSES:

MR. MC CANDLESS:

have not made any comment to the Legislature;
we have not been asked to make any comment.
As a matter of fact, we have not been asked
to comment on any of these bills, either by
the Administration or by the Legislature.

As to the other provisions in the bill, as I"
far as I'm concerned I have no feeling. I have
heard many comments as to the constitutionality
of the other provisions in placing a moratorium
on the initiation and adjudication of water
rights. I am not an attorney and I have no
comment on that."

"I think we ought to call for comment from
the attorney for the Board, if he has any, on
H. B. 432."

"Well, I will say that I have not done any
research on this at all but my first impression
is that the provision in the bill which puts a
moratorium on the - or, it says, the court shall
hold in abeyance all actions pending, - and
then sub-paragraph (3) on page 3 says 'No rule
or doctrine of law shall operate to give pro-
posed diversions from such major basin or basins
initiated during the period of said moratorium
preference over any uses or appropriations with-
in such basin or basins initiated during the
same period of time'; and, as you know, we have
a constitutional provision that says the right
to appropriate the waters of any stream will
never be denied so that's the part that concerns
me. I don't see how you can put a moratorium on
the initiation of an appropriation. Appropria-
tion is not accomplished by a court decree, it
is accomplished by taking the water and applying
it to a beneficial use. The decree is merely
evidence of the appropriation.

II

That part does concern me and I would con-
tinue to be concerned unless I was shown some
authority that the state could suspend this
temporarily. "

"Mr. Chairman, there are a couple of things