Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 42-203A (2026)

Notice upon receipt of application — Protest — Hearing and findings — Appeals. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Notice upon receipt of application — Protest — Hearing and findings — Appeals. 

(1) Upon receipt of an application to appropriate the waters of this state, the department of water resources shall prepare a notice in such form as the department may prescribe, specifying: (a) the number of the application; (b) the date of filing thereof; (c) the name and post-office address of the applicant; (d) the source of the water supply; (e) the amount of water to be appropriated; (f) in general the nature of the proposed use; (g) the approximate location of the point of diversion; and (h) the point of use. The department shall also state in said notice that any protest against the approval of such application, in form prescribed by the department, shall be filed with the department within ten (10) days from the last date of publication of such notice.

(2)  The director of the department of water resources shall cause the notice to be published in a newspaper printed within the county wherein the point of diversion lies or, in the event no newspaper is printed in said county, then in a newspaper of general circulation therein. When the application proposes a diversion in excess of ten (10) c.f.s. or one thousand (1,000) acre feet, the director shall cause the notice to be published in a newspaper or newspapers sufficient to achieve statewide circulation. Any notice shall be published at least once each week for two (2) successive weeks.
(3)  The director of the department shall also cause notice of the application to be accessible from the department’s internet homepage beginning on or before the date the application is first published in the newspaper as described in subsection (2) of this section, and ending no sooner than the deadline for protesting the application, consistent with subsection (1) of this section. Notice accessible from the internet homepage may be represented by an abstract, summary, or other such representation that includes all the information required by subsection (1) of this section for notice of an application. The notice published in the newspaper pursuant to subsection (2) of this section shall be the official notice. Errors or omissions in the notices accessible from the internet homepage shall not invalidate the published notice.
(4)  Any person, firm, association or corporation concerned in any such application may, within the time allowed in the notice of application, file with said director of the department of water resources a written protest, together with the statutory filing fee as provided in section 42-221, Idaho Code, against the approval of such application, which protest shall state the name and address of protestant and shall be signed by him or by his agent or attorney and shall clearly set forth his objections to the approval of such application. Hearing upon the protest so filed shall be held within sixty (60) days from the date such protest is received. Notice of this hearing shall be given by mailing notice not less than ten (10) days before the date of hearing and shall be forwarded to both the applicant and the protestant, or protestants, by certified mail. Such notice shall state the names of the applicant and protestant, or protestants, the time and place fixed for the hearing and such other information as the director of the department of water resources may deem advisable. In the event that no protest is filed, then the director of the department of water resources may forthwith approve the application, providing the same in all respects conforms with the requirements of this chapter, and with the regulations of the department of water resources.
(5)  Such hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of section 42-1701A(1) and (2), Idaho Code. The director of the department of water resources shall find and determine from the evidence presented to what use or uses the water sought to be appropriated can be and are intended to be applied. In all applications whether protested or not protested, where the proposed use is such: (a) that it will reduce the quantity of water under existing water rights, or (b) that the water supply itself is insufficient for the purpose for which it is sought to be appropriated, or (c) where it appears to the satisfaction of the director that such application is not made in good faith, is made for delay or speculative purposes, or (d) that the applicant has not sufficient financial resources with which to complete the work involved therein, or (e) that it will conflict with the local public interest as defined in section 42-202B, Idaho Code, or (f) that it is contrary to conservation of water resources within the state of Idaho, or (g) that it will adversely affect the local economy of the watershed or local area within which the source of water for the proposed use originates, in the case where the place of use is outside of the watershed or local area where the source of water originates; the director of the department of water resources may reject such application and refuse issuance of a permit therefor, or may partially approve and grant a permit for a smaller quantity of water than applied for, or may grant a permit upon conditions. Provided however, that minimum stream flow water rights may not be established under the local public interest criterion, and may only be established pursuant to chapter 15, title 42, Idaho Code. The provisions of this section shall apply to any boundary stream between this and any other state in all cases where the water sought to be appropriated has its source largely within the state, irrespective of the location of any proposed power generating plant.
(6)  Any person or corporation who has formally appeared at the hearing, aggrieved by the judgment of the director of the department of water resources, may seek judicial review thereof in accordance with section 42-1701A(4), Idaho Code.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1985–2016 · leading case: Shokal v. Dunn, 707 P.2d 441 (Idaho 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Shokal v. Dunn, 707 P.2d 441 (Idaho 1985). · cites it 23× “Judge Schroeder also determined that Water Resources had failed to properly evaluate the question of “local public interest,” holding that the applicant had the ultimate burden of proving that a proposed water use was in the local public interest under I.C. § 42-203A. 1 In…”
Hardy v. Higginson, 849 P.2d 946 (Idaho 1993). · cites it 12× “§ 42-203A, which in turn refers to the local public interest; and (2) he could consider the local public interest when considering whether the “rights of others would be adversely affected” by the proposed amendment as directed in the first paragraph of I.C. § 42-211. The…”
Idaho Power Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 255 P.3d 1152 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 6× “If the applicant is granted a permit, the applicant then has a specified period of time to submit proof that the applicant has completed actual construction of the project and applied the water to full beneficial use.”
Dovel v. Dobson, 831 P.2d 527 (Idaho 1992). · cites it 4× “This testimony constituted substantial and competent evidence to support the director's decision that there had not been a forfeiture of the water appurtenant to the first and second fields.”
Fremont-Madison Irrigation Dist. & Mitigation Grp. v. Idaho Ground Water Appropriators, Inc., 926 P.2d 1301 (Idaho 1996). · cites it 4× “The notice shall contain a summary of the notice of claim and shall be published in the same manner as notices for applications to appropriate water in section 42-203A, Idaho Code. Any person who has filed an application for a water right prior to the enactment of this act or…”
North Snake Ground Water Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 376 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2016). · cites it 10× “” I.C. § 42-203A(5). Speculation is defined as “an intention to obtain a permit to appropriate water without the intention of applying the water to beneficial use with reasonable diligence.”
Chisholm v. Idaho Dept. of Water Resources, 125 P.3d 515 (Idaho 2005). · cites it 2× “the change is consistent with the conservation of water resources within the state of Idaho and is in the local public interest as defined in section 42-203A(5), Idaho Code . . . 1997 Idaho Session Laws, ch.”
Collins Bros. v. Dunn, 759 P.2d 891 (Idaho 1988). · cites it 6× “I.C. § 42-203A provides in part: "(5) Such hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of section 42-1701A(1) and (2), Idaho Code.”
— Idaho Code § 42-203A(5) — 4 cases
Idaho Power Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 255 P.3d 1152 (Idaho 2011). “If the applicant is granted a permit, the applicant then has a specified period of time to submit proof that the applicant has completed actual construction of the project and applied the water to full beneficial use.”
Chisholm v. Idaho Dept. of Water Resources, 125 P.3d 515 (Idaho 2005). “the change is consistent with the conservation of water resources within the state of Idaho and is in the local public interest as defined in section 42-203A(5), Idaho Code . . . 1997 Idaho Session Laws, ch.”
North Snake Ground Water Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 376 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2016). “” I.C. § 42-203A(5). Speculation is defined as “an intention to obtain a permit to appropriate water without the intention of applying the water to beneficial use with reasonable diligence.”
Collins Bros. v. Dunn, 759 P.2d 891 (Idaho 1988). “I.C. § 42-203A provides in part: "(5) Such hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of section 42-1701A(1) and (2), Idaho Code.”
— Idaho Code § 42-203A(5)(c) — 1 case
North Snake Ground Water Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 376 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2016). “” I.C. § 42-203A(5). Speculation is defined as “an intention to obtain a permit to appropriate water without the intention of applying the water to beneficial use with reasonable diligence.”
— Idaho Code § 42-203A(5)(d) — 1 case
Shokal v. Dunn, 707 P.2d 441 (Idaho 1985). “Judge Schroeder also determined that Water Resources had failed to properly evaluate the question of “local public interest,” holding that the applicant had the ultimate burden of proving that a proposed water use was in the local public interest under I.C. § 42-203A. 1 In…”
— Idaho Code § 42-203A(5)(e) — 3 cases
Dovel v. Dobson, 831 P.2d 527 (Idaho 1992). “This testimony constituted substantial and competent evidence to support the director's decision that there had not been a forfeiture of the water appurtenant to the first and second fields.”
Shokal v. Dunn, 707 P.2d 441 (Idaho 1985). “Judge Schroeder also determined that Water Resources had failed to properly evaluate the question of “local public interest,” holding that the applicant had the ultimate burden of proving that a proposed water use was in the local public interest under I.C. § 42-203A. 1 In…”
North Snake Ground Water Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 376 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2016). “” I.C. § 42-203A(5). Speculation is defined as “an intention to obtain a permit to appropriate water without the intention of applying the water to beneficial use with reasonable diligence.”
— Idaho Code § 42-203A(g) — 1 case
North Snake Ground Water Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 376 P.3d 722 (Idaho 2016). “” I.C. § 42-203A(5). Speculation is defined as “an intention to obtain a permit to appropriate water without the intention of applying the water to beneficial use with reasonable diligence.”
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.