Laserfiche WebLink
<br />.- <br /> <br />. r.',"" "l r") <br />U ';j ~l '- ,J' <br /> <br />DRAFT <br /> <br />IV. State of'Utah <br /> <br />A. Acquisition, Adjudication and Administration of Water Rights <br /> <br />The basis of Utah's present-day procedure for appropriating water <br /> <br />was the Act of 1903 which was subsequently revised and re-enacted into <br /> <br />what is today a Dr.cad and comprehensive water code. <br /> <br /> <br />The. Utah Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality 'of Utah's <br /> <br />present water right law and declared that the state has the right to <br /> <br />control the appropriation and distribution of the public waters within <br /> <br />its boundaries. <br /> <br />The current Utah statutes provide that all waters in this state, <br /> <br />whether above or ~nder the ground, are public property and that rights <br /> <br />to use the unappr~priated waters can only be acquired by filing an appli- <br /> <br />cation to. appropriate. This statutory procedure is now the exclusive <br /> <br />method of appropriating water in this Btate. Ap~lications to appro~riate <br /> <br />are filed in the office of the state engineer and unappropriated water <br /> <br />may be acquir~d for any recognized beneficial use. <br />f <br /> <br />Upon receipt of an application, notice is published in the county <br /> <br />where tfue point of diversion is located and protests against the appli- <br /> <br />cation may be submitted within 30 days following the last publication <br /> <br />date. If a protest is filed the state engineer conducts an informal <br /> <br />hearing with the applicant and the protestant and receives whatever <br /> <br />relevant evidence the parties desire to submit. <br /> <br />Before approving an application, the state engineer must find that <br /> <br />there is unappropriated water in the source that can be diverted without <br /> <br />interfering with existing rights. He must also conclude that the appli- <br /> <br />cation is engineeringly and economically feasible and that the application <br /> <br />is not contrary to the general public welfare and is not filed for purposes <br /> <br />of speculation and monopoly. As will be discussed in more detail later, <br /> <br />the decision of the state engineer is subject to appeal to the District <br /> <br />15. <br /> <br />,1> <br />