Nature of property in water.
Water being essential to the industrial prosperity of the state, and all agricultural development throughout the greater portion of the state depending upon its just apportionment to, and economical use by, those making a beneficial application of the same, its control shall be in the state, which, in providing for its use, shall equally guard all the various interests involved. All the waters of the state, when flowing in their natural channels, including the waters of all natural springs and lakes within the boundaries of the state are declared to be the property of the state, whose duty it shall be to supervise their appropriation and allotment to those diverting the same therefrom for any beneficial purpose, and the right to the use of any of the waters of the state for useful or beneficial purposes is recognized and confirmed; and the right to the use of any of the public waters which have heretofore been or may hereafter be allotted or beneficially applied, shall not be considered as being a property right in itself, but such right shall become the complement of, or one of the appurtenances of, the land or other thing to which, through necessity, said water is being applied; and the right to continue the use of any such water shall never be denied or prevented from any other cause than the failure on the part of the user thereof to pay the ordinary charges or assessments which may be made to cover the expenses for the delivery of such water.
Notes of Decisions
Clear Springs Foods, Inc. v. Spackman, 252 P.3d 71 (Idaho 2011).
· cites it 6× “The following year, the legislature enacted what is now codified as Idaho Code § 42-101 and which provides in part: Water being essential to the industrial prosperity of the state, and all agricultural development throughout the greater portion of the state depending upon its…”
Idaho v. Coeur D'Alene Tribe of Idaho, 521 U.S. 261 (1997).
· cites it 2× “" Idaho Code § 42-101 (1990). Title to these public waters is held by the State of Idaho in its sovereign capacity for the purpose of ensuring that it is used for the public benefit.”
Daryl K. & Linda L. Mullinix v. Killgore's Salmon River Fruit Co., 346 P.3d 286 (Idaho 2015).
· cites it 10× “Under Idaho Code § 42-101 , Mullinix, as successors in interest to land held previously by both James *275 and Josephine Killgore and Louis and Ma[u]de Weise, have a legal interest in the continuing water rights as established by Idaho statute.”
Ralph Naylor Farms, LLC v. Latah Cnty., 172 P.3d 1081 (Idaho 2007).
· cites it 8× “Idaho Code § 42-101 provides in pertinent part: "Water being essential to the industrial prosperity of the state, .”
DeRousse v. Higginson, 505 P.2d 321 (Idaho 1973).
· cites it 12× “In conformity with this authority the legislature enacted I.C. § 42-101 which provides not only that the control of the waters shall be in the state, but that the state "shall equally guard all the various interests involved.”
Vill. of Peck v. Denison, 450 P.2d 310 (Idaho 1969).
· cites it 8× “Accordingly I would reverse the decision of the district court in this regard. SMITH, C.J., concurs in the foregoing.”
Joyce Livestock Co. v. United States, 156 P.3d 502 (Idaho 2007).
· cites it 2× “I.C. § 42-101 provides that the “waters of the state, when flowing in their natural channels,” are subject to appropriation.”
California v. United States, 438 U.S. 645 (1978).
· cites it 2× “Mead was a principal witness before Congress during the hearings on the Reclamation Act of 1902 and later became Commissioner of Reclamation, serving in that position from 1924 until his death in 1936. Three Western States have adopted constitutional provisions asserting…”
Poole v. Olaveson, 356 P.2d 61 (Idaho 1960).
· cites it 6× ““All the waters of the state, when flowing in their natural channels, including the waters of all natural springs and lakes within the boundaries of the state are declared to be the property of the state, whose duty it shall be to supervise their appropriation and allotment to…”
Kunz v. Utah Power & Light Co., 792 P.2d 926 (Idaho 1990).
· cites it 4× “2d 965 [(1957)]; I.C. §§ 42-101 and 42-104." Poole v. Olaveson, 82 Idaho 496, 502 , 356 P.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.