PROJ00506

• Contract/PO #: C153824
• Contractor Name: Preisser, Rodney J.
• Contract Type: Loan
• Water District: 17
• County: Lincoln
• Bill Number: SPL
• Loan Projects - Doc Type: Feasibility Study

~

~

I

Section 1~8-18-36(2) p~ovides, ~ ali2:

"Upon receipt of an application for a . . new,
increased or additional supply of grou.d water
from an area outside the boundaries 0 a
designated ground water basin, ..,th state
en ineer shall make a determination as to whether
or not the re uested ermit will m eriall in-
ure the vested water'ri hts of 0 ers. If the
state en ineer shall find that t re is una ro-
riated water available for with rawal b the
ro osed well and that the vest d water ri hts
or others will not be material in ured and
can be substantiated b h dro ieal and
eolo ieal raets he shall is ue a ' ermit
to construct a well. but no otherwise;.....
Emphasis supplied

I

I

I

I

I

(l9~0)

The Supreme Court has

occasion to comment

I

on the weight to be given the the ~tate engineer.
In Kui er v. Well Owners Conserv ion Association, ~90 P2d 268

I

(Colo. 1971) the Court said:

record and particularly

I

I

Although.

to the validity of .'regulat~ons",

I

there appears to be 0 reason why the same weight should not be

given 10ns.' such as the state engineer 1s required

I

to ~ake under the proviSions or Sec. 1~8-18-36(2) quoted above.

In

1 er case above, the Supreme Court went on to

I

quote with

oval Railroad Commission of Texas v. Rowan &

NiChols Oil

310 U.S. 573, 60 S. Ct. 102~, 84 L. Ed. 1368

United States Supreme Court said:

I

/
/

"Certainly in a domain of knowledge still
shifting and gro\;ing, and in a field Hhe~e
judgment is therefore necessarily beset by
the necessity of inferences bordcrinB or.
conjecture even for tr.ose learned in the
a~t, it would be o~es~~otuous for courts,
on the basis of co~flictin~ exoert test1~ony.
to deem the view o~ the 2dmlnistrative
tribunal. act1n~ under le~islative authority,
offensive to the Fourte,enth Amendment.. "
(Emphasis supplied).

I

I

the right to appropriate water 13 clearly a property right

PI"otccted by the Fourteenth Amendment, the opinions of experts

I