Laserfiche WebLink
<br />-'OU2"~7 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />~ that the land was reserved. For example, the reserved right for <br />minimum stream flows and lake levels on national forests bears a priority <br />date as of June 12, 1960, rather than any earlier date of reservation. <br />In addition, all rights on the national forests, regardless of the date <br />upon which such right was established are subject to the terms of 16 <br />U.S.C. fi481, which permit the use of all water on the national forests <br />for domestic, mining, milling, and irrigation purposes. <br /> <br />It seems obvious that the Master Referee's partial report can be <br /> <br />considered support for state water interests, however, litigation will <br /> <br />undoubtedly continue to the United States Supreme Court. <br /> <br />The impact of federal reserved water rights on prior appropriative <br /> <br />water rights is readily perceived by noting the two principal characteristics <br /> <br />of reserved rights which are discussed in the partial report. <br /> <br />(1) The priority of that right, that is, the date of the creation <br /> <br />of the reservation, and <br /> <br />(2) The quantum of that right, that is, the amount of the available <br /> <br />unappropriated water reasonably necessary to accomplish the purpose for <br /> <br />which the land was reserved. <br /> <br />Underlying these is the absence of any limitation or loss of the <br /> <br />reserved right by non-use. Given these characteristics and the Supreme <br /> <br />Court acceptance of this philosophy, it is likely that appropriation <br /> <br />rights initiated under state laws after the date of the creation of the <br /> <br />reservation will be subordinate to federal uses under the reservation <br /> <br />even though the federal use is made long after the date of appropriation. <br /> <br />The final decision in Water Divisions 4, 5, and 6 will undoubtedly <br /> <br />play an important role in the decision to be made in Water Division No. <br /> <br />7 which is now pending in the state water court as a result of the Akin <br /> <br />decision. It is apparent that the decision in Water Division No. 7 will <br /> <br />-8- <br />