|
<br />'::Il: ~
<br />~.""
<br />C C,11~WATER RIcirrs "
<br />
<br />~~
<br />
<br />AND
<br />PRIOR APPROPRIA1JO~
<br />
<br />. f~,':
<br />QUANTIlY, SCHEDULE AND POINT OF DIVER~
<br />SION: a permit to appropriate waterw:il!
<br />specify a quantity of water, either in'vol~
<br />ume (typically acre.feet) or rate of flow<
<br />(cubic feet per second ~ cis); a schedule
<br />during the year wh,:?,n' thewater'canbe'
<br />used (this wiUbe d~~ermined by water
<br />needs related to thesp'ecific beneficial
<br />use) and aspecific point Ofi8 stream froI!\
<br />which the water will be taken. This Iastis'
<br />extremely imp-ortal1t,sinc~.theplaceof
<br />diversion .~an ~uenc~, the availability of
<br />water for other user~: i;. ,
<br />, ,~,
<br />Stateoffi~,ials ri1ustm~ke a finding itlall',
<br />three states be0re g~~RHng~ wate~"penl}~,i
<br />~,}l~at waterisavailablefor,the approPl,i,~~"
<br />tion.i\~ail~bil~ty ~~!ers tq ~he impact'of.~;,~7
<br />new apPr?priationon,existiIlg water" :5!ti '-',
<br />righ,ts.1f it' i$,~~u1)9 tfl,~tth~ par~~cuhw:"~
<br />appropriatiJh>>,()tlld'd,ip1i~ish, ~~terQ ~.,
<br />availabl~tq,satisfyexiStingrjghts~"the~,~
<br />permit caitnot b,e granted uriIe~s'other' .
<br />, h lird' ,r. ""
<br />rIg ts are re .e. &f ',; r.I. kt~"\)
<br />!he ,three sj~at~~;/~!theupp~r ~o"GrariSi~~:
<br />basin ~iffer in?tIlercdteria they,applYJ()r,~'
<br />new appropriatiol\'spfsurface yl~te~"'J>~b,~,,,
<br />lie welfare andcol1Srf\latio~,;'Criteria:' were ~
<br />adopted by the New:MC?C~cb,legislat~re in;~J'
<br />APPROPRJA:tION.!;, the ""ah~r must be cap~ 1985. New apPl'Opriations,mustnoW be:, [$'~
<br />tured and put to use..;.;.state cas~r)aw sug-' Aound to be,c()Ilsister\t withh~alth"and
<br />gest$ that a p~ysicaldiversiori of the water welf~ criteria, and alsp: ~ot co,nf1ict:wifn~
<br />{rein the stream is an integral part of th~ ~~ the n'eed t? ~esolve,:water sh9rtage:€rob-, ~~
<br />appropri~Y9n~ ' lems in th~,~.!a~~,~~T~~;al~o fEiqu~es spe.
<br />cuk water cons~~v~t.i01} plans as"a co~di~'
<br />BENEFICIAL USE: the use must be ori~ that ;,,1ioll ota new approp:t;j~tion:,CoJorad9
<br />is recogniZed asbencfiCial under state \~do~s not have public ~~Ifare criteria~'.i
<br />law; Such usesilldude,domesticcon~ .-:.: ,:'~'.'
<br />sumption, IivestOck\:Vatering, irrigation, Once ~",water right ~as fie~!tsr.:~nted(jt
<br />mining, P?wergfme~at:ion, municipal use has the:statUso{~, vest~<t,r:ropel'tyrightj
<br />and ot.hers; At present: New M~ic(j does assuming that wateris sonsist,e9tly. '-:#~&~
<br />. '. - in accordance with.terms of the permit;. ~.
<br />not recognize instream uses as beneficial, .
<br />th.ough Colorado and Texas do. Under the and can be sold,leased q~ traded freely:
<br />NeitherCol,orado riOI' New.'" Mexico.ij,
<br />law of aU three states water cannot be . .... ..... '.
<br />,., .. "require any recording of the i.':a.le ofa
<br />'appropriate'd ocly to be wasted or simply . ... . . .
<br />to beheld for speculation. water right, thotlg~Texas,does'requir.~. . '11
<br />.... lfi' that the water commission be' notified of a
<br />, sale. The real reguI~tion,'()ta. 'trah~sfer
<br />CONtINUOUS USE; water must be applied.. . ..' .'
<br />, consistently to the use for which the per~ cOn:tes when permissi~n:'is.~ought for a
<br />~. m:it"is granted.. Failure to use water benefi~ change in the, use or pl~ce <>:~.. tini~ of
<br />diversion. ~~ :.~, :t;
<br />ciallyc,ontinuously over time can result in
<br />forfelfUre of the tight or a judicial finding
<br />of abandon-\TIent. Priority of appropria-
<br />tion, ~'fir.st in tim~is first in right:' is the
<br />. famous fcit'mulation of priority. Under
<br />drought conditions, short~ges are not
<br />. shared proportionately among all rights
<br />i holders.. ~ather the senior rights are satis.:"J.
<br />. Hedin chronological order of apPr:opria~
<br />tion, and junior users are simply cut off
<br />when the,water runs out.
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />ill'
<br />
<br />THE,SYSTEM of creating and re.allocating
<br />water rights understate Jaw in Colorado,
<br />Ne:vv.J:vfexico and Texas depen~s prin-
<br />dpaiiy on the legal doctrine of prior
<br />apPropriation. Rights to use water flow~
<br />,ing in surface streams depend on acquir~
<br />inga permit from the state government.
<br />The, state is considered to.be the' owner of
<br />aprbperty, surface water,'which it holds
<br />intrust for the public::lndividuals can
<br />neverownsurfacc,water outright; they
<br />can r~ceive state"permits to utilize water
<br />for'speCific purposes,. known'a's beneficial.
<br />uses/The,supply'is limited, and in fact
<br />surfacewaterin the,Rio Grande basin of
<br />all three states hasbeen"fully permitted,
<br />orappropriated, Inprde~,to allocate water
<br />fairly to holders of Sfate~created rights
<br />when: drqught conditions prevail,. state
<br />officials ptovidewater t()those.ri.ght
<br />holders who made the earliestappropria~
<br />tions fo\-benefic\al u~e. !he priority of
<br />dghtsdepen~s uponth(tdate when the
<br />water permit was obtained .
<br />
<br />Key Elemel1ts of the Brior
<br />~,Appropriatioil System
<br />
<br />'--
<br />
<br /><0;
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />:~
<br />
<br />,ti;~
<br />
<br />Such a change is the subj,ectof a fortll,al
<br />applicat,ion procedurei~l~lrthree states.>:: ',:})
<br />Transfers ate not permitt~d if ch;tnges in ~
<br />use> place, time ormethod'Of diversioK:.,
<br />, ., .,>1!.f,' .."",
<br />would hav~,a~ impact onotherw~te,r.w. .. ~~
<br />rig~ts. h?ld~rS: That impac(fould~,~clu~ "~
<br />a dummshment of the amount of water or lli
<br />the:,timing of de~iv~ry orthe'.:qlfality~hf ij
<br />water that a rightShold~l',hascome,to
<br />depend on. ~., ti~~
<br />
<br />:.r
<br />
<br />", .Ii! ,
<br />
<br />~
<br />
<br />'c;>,::I<>
<br />
<br />f.~
<br />
<br />26
<br />
<br />;if:
<br />
<br />tion methods in order to help meet
<br />future needs. It has enacted building
<br />codes that mandate water saving fix~
<br />tures, metering of water usage,
<br />educational programs, and other
<br />attempts at curtailing water con~
<br />sumption, It has also initiated the $33
<br />million Hueco Bolson Recharge Pro-
<br />ject, designed to reclaim sewage
<br />effluent and return it into the aquifer
<br />for subsequent use. These programs,
<br />however, are not sufficient to meet El
<br />Paso's growing demands, and in 1980,
<br />the city made its move toward
<br />appropriating ground water beneath
<br />New Mexico lands.
<br />
<br />.':. ~.
<br />
<br />,):;
<br />
<br />~;
<br />
<br />El Paso went to court in September
<br />1980 claiming that New Mexico's ban
<br />on exporting water into other states
<br />was illegal. This suit set off a series of
<br />legal maneuvers that included:
<br />
<br />>,
<br />
<br />" On September 11 and 12, 1980, the
<br />New Mexico State Engineer
<br />declared "administrative basins"
<br />covering large portions of the
<br />Hueco Bolson and Mesilla Bol-
<br />sons, thereby mandating that
<br />ground water users apply for state
<br />permits to drill new wells.
<br />
<br />" Shortly thereafler, El Paso filed
<br />326 permit applications for wells
<br />in the Hueco Bolson and Mesilla
<br />Bolson aquifers, requesting a total
<br />annual pumping rate of 296,000 af.
<br />
<br />. The federal district court ruled on
<br />January 17, 1983, that New Mex,
<br />iea's ban on water exports was
<br />unconstitutional. (On appeal, the
<br />Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals
<br />remanded the case back to the
<br />district court to consider the facts
<br />in light of the following devel,
<br />opment,)
<br />
<br />" On February 22, 1983, the New
<br />Mexico Legislature repealed its
<br />export ban and enacted a new
<br />statute regulating the appropria.
<br />tion of water for out-of-state use.
<br />The statute provided that, in order
<br />to approve a water export appIica~
<br />tion, the State Engineer must find
<br />that the proposed diversion "is
<br />not contrary to the conservation of
<br />
|