Idaho Code
Idaho Code § 42-602 (2026)
Director of the department of water resources to supervise water distribution within water districts.
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
IClegislature.idaho.gov
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Director of the department of water resources to supervise water distribution within water districts.
The director of the department of water resources shall have direction and control of the distribution of water from all natural water sources within a water district to the canals, ditches, pumps and other facilities diverting therefrom. Distribution of water within water districts created pursuant to section 42-604, Idaho Code, shall be accomplished by watermasters as provided in this chapter and supervised by the director.
The director of the department of water resources shall distribute water in water districts in accordance with the prior appropriation doctrine. The provisions of chapter 6, title 42, Idaho Code, shall apply only to distribution of water within a water district.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1972–2024 · leading case: Musser v. Higginson, 871 P.2d 809 (Idaho 1994).
Musser v. Higginson, 871 P.2d 809 (Idaho 1994). “The primary issue presented is whether the trial court properly issued a writ of mandate ordering the director (the director) of the Idaho department of water resources (the department) immediately to comply with I.C. § 42-602 and distribute water in accordance with the doctrine…”
A & B Irrigation Dist. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 284 P.3d 225 (Idaho 2012). “The thrust of the opinion dealt with the Director’s duties under I.C. § 42-602 and the principles of mandamus.”
Thompson Creek Mining Co. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 220 P.3d 318 (Idaho 2009). “I.C. § 42-602. To fulfill this duty IDWR is authorized to create water districts throughout the state.”
Rangen, Inc. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 367 P.3d 193 (Idaho 2016). “” In the present case, that statutory obligation required the Director to interpret Rangeris partial decrees, which he dutifully did.”
Rangen, Inc. v. Idaho Dep't of Water Resources, 371 P.3d 305 (Idaho 2016). “Pursuant to this authority, IDWR promulgated the Conjunctive Management Rules (“CMRs”) to provide the procedures for responding to delivery calls made by the holder of a senior-priority surface or ground water right against the holder of a junior-priority ground water *256 right.”
A & B Irrigation Dist. v. State, 336 P.3d 792 (Idaho 2014). “The legislature also provided for the Director to accomplish water distributions with watermasters who act in accordance with prior appropriation and are supervised by the Director.”
South Valley Ground Water v. ID Dept of Water Resources, 548 P.3d 734 (Idaho 2024). “The Statement of Purpose explained that the 1994 amendments were intended to clarify the limitations on the use of a writ of mandamus to force the curtailment of water, by giving the Director discretionary authority to administer water outside of organized districts: In 1992,…”
DeRousse v. Higginson, 505 P.2d 321 (Idaho 1973). “I.C. § 42-602. Watermasters administer the diversion of the water out of the streams and are annually elected in each of the water districts within the state.”
Marty v. State, 786 P.2d 524 (Idaho 1989). “I.C. § 42-602. To fulfill this duty IDWR is authorized to create water districts throughout the state.”
State v. Nelson, 951 P.2d 943 (Idaho 1998). “These rules and regulations are subject to amendment or repeal by the IDWR. I.C. § 67-5201(20) (1997). Additionally, the IDWR’s Director is in charge of distributing water from all natural water resources or supervising the distribution.”
Nelson v. Big Lost River Irrigation Dist., 219 P.3d 804 (Idaho 2009). “The Department’s director has “direction and control of the distribution of water from all natural water sources within a water district to the canals, ditches, pumps and other facilities diverting therefrom,” I.C. § 42-602, including “water ... turned into the channel of a…”
Almo Water Co. v. Darrington, 501 P.2d 700 (Idaho 1972). “I.C. §§ 42-602, 42-607; Stethem v. Skinner, 11 Idaho 374 , 82 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.