Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 42-103 (2026)
Right acquired by appropriation.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Right acquired by appropriation.
The right to the use of the unappropriated waters of rivers, streams, lakes, springs, and of subterranean waters or other sources within this state shall hereafter be acquired only by appropriation under the application, permit and license procedure as provided for in this title, unless hereinafter in this title excepted.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14
cases, 1956–2018 · leading case: Idaho Power Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 255 P.3d 1152 (Idaho 2011).
Idaho Power Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 255 P.3d 1152 (Idaho 2011). “However, in 1971 the Legislature amended I.C. §§ 42-103 and 42-201 to require water users to comply with the statutory method of appropriating water.”
State, Dept. of Parks v. Idaho Dept, Water Admin., 530 P.2d 924 (Idaho 1974). “177 (1971); See I.C. § 42-103, 42-201. In the statute before us, I.”
Joyce Livestock Co. v. United States, 156 P.3d 502 (Idaho 2007). “In 1971 the legislature amended Idaho Code §§ 42-103 and 42-201 to require compliance with the statutory application, permit, and license procedure in order to acquire new water rights.”
A & B Irrigation Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 284 P.3d 225 (Idaho 2012). “2d 761, 765-66 (1964) (superseded by statute, I.C. § 42-103 (1971)). Idaho law also provides that the burden of establishing waste is on the junior appropriator.”
Nettleton v. Higginson, 558 P.2d 1048 (Idaho 1977). “Even if upon investigation by the Water Resource Board or some interested person a means of diversion, as claimed by appellant, is discovered, there still remains the unanswered questions concerning the date such diversion of water was put into operation; the amount of water…”
Fremont-Madison Irrigation Dist. & Mitigation Grp. v. Idaho Ground Water Appropriators, Inc., 926 P.2d 1301 (Idaho 1996). “Nevertheless, those rights acquired by the constitutional method through diversion and appropriation to beneficial use prior to 1971 remain valid, I.C. §§ 42-103, -201, so long as any aüeged water right has been duly registered with the Idaho Department of Water Resources…”
Baker v. Ore-Ida Foods, Inc., 513 P.2d 627 (Idaho 1973). “The regulation is in accord with Article 15, Sections 1 and 3, of Idaho’s Constitution, and with I.C. §§ 42-103 and 42-226. Thereby the legislature prescribed that from the effective date of the act which precedes the present action, the statutory method of appropriation would…”
Crow v. Carlson, 690 P.2d 916 (Idaho 1984). “15, § 3 provides, in pertinent part, “The right to divert and appropriate the unappropriated waters of any natural stream to beneficial uses, shall never be denied, except that the state may regulate and limit the use thereof for power purposes.”
State Ex Rerl. Tappan v. Smith, 444 P.2d 412 (Idaho 1968). “Under our constitutional sanction, I.C. § 42-103 states that “The right to the use of the waters of rivers, streams, lakes, springs, and of subterranean waters, may be acquired by appropriation.”
R.T. Nahas Co. v. Hulet, 752 P.2d 625 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). “I.C. §§ 42-103, 42-201. Thus, an appropriator, whose right is based upon a valid, although unadjudicated, constitutional method of appropriation, retains a senior claim in relation to a person holding a later issued *27 permit.”
Ward v. Kidd, 392 P.2d 183 (Idaho 1964). “He testified he used the water for irrigation any time it would flow upon his land; in addition to the usual irrigation season he used the water in early spring, late summer, and fall.”
Whittaker v. Kauer, 298 P.2d 745 (Idaho 1956). “§ 42-101; I.C. § 42-103; Jones v. McIntire, 60 Idaho 338 , 91 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.