Laserfiche WebLink
<br />(;J <br />('') <br />-;.,~ <br /> <br />...) <br /> <br />c) <br />C':'J <br /> <br />dominant eminent domain mentioned by the 'i'laldeck <br /> <br />13 <br />Report. <br /> <br />Generally speaking, property which has been taken or is devoted <br /> <br />to a public use cannot be taken by eminent domain for another <br /> <br />public use in such manner or to such extent that the use to which <br /> <br />it is first taken or devoted will be wholly defeated or <br /> <br />superseded, unless the power to exercise dominant eminent domain <br /> <br />under those circumstances is granted expressly or by necessary <br /> <br />implication by the condemning statute. Denver Power & Irrigation <br /> <br />Co. v. Denver & Rio Grande RR Co., 30 Colo. 204, 69 P. 568 <br /> <br />(1902). If the need to implement salinity control is viewed as a <br /> <br />priority public policy issue, and salinity control measures will, <br /> <br />or potentially will, preclude the use of any other public purpose <br /> <br />within an easement area, then the power of dominant eminent <br /> <br />domain must be granted specifically under the condemning statute. <br /> <br />E. Control Over Shareholders. <br /> <br />As earlier mentioned, shareholders in a mutual irrigation <br /> <br />company have the power to move the use of their water from parcel <br /> <br />to parcel and from headgate to head gate because the water is not <br /> <br />tied or restricted by allotment to any specific tract or parcel <br /> <br />of land. <br /> <br />This means that a shareholder may divert his water <br /> <br />outside of the mutual irrigation company's system so long as <br /> <br />other shareholders are not injured. <br /> <br />Fort Lyons Canal Co. v. <br /> <br />13 <br />Waldeck Report, Section VII, ~ 9.(c), p. 28. <br /> <br />21 <br />