Distribution of water.
It shall be the duty of said watermaster to distribute the waters of the public stream, streams, or water supply comprising a water district among the water users taking water therefrom according to the prior rights of each respectively, in whole or in part, and to shut and fasten, or cause to be shut or fastened, under the direction of the department of water resources, the headgates or controlling works for the diversion of water from such stream, streams, or water supply, during times of water scarcity, in order to supply the prior rights of others from such stream or water supply; provided, that any person or corporation claiming the right to the use of the waters of the stream or water supply comprising a water district, but not owning or having the use of an adjudicated or decreed right therein, or right therein evidenced by permit or license issued by the department of water resources, shall, for the purposes of distribution during times of water scarcity, be held to have a right subsequent to any adjudicated, decreed, permit, or licensed right from such stream or water supply, and the watermaster shall close all headgates or controlling works of diversions having no adjudicated, decreed, permit or licensed right if necessary to supply adjudicated, decreed, permit or licensed right in such stream or water supply. As long as a duly elected watermaster is charged with the administration of the waters within a water district, no water user within such district can adversely possess the right of any other water user.
Notes of Decisions
Nettleton v. Higginson, 558 P.2d 1048 (Idaho 1977).
· cites it 80× “Appellant assigns error to the lower court's failure to find the provisions of I.C. § 42-607 in violation of his constitutional rights.”
DeRousse v. Higginson, 505 P.2d 321 (Idaho 1973).
· cites it 66× “Defendants contend that the remaining language in I.C. § 42-607, as amended, taken together with the definition of "right" as added to I.”
Sears v. Berryman, 623 P.2d 455 (Idaho 1981).
· cites it 12× “I.C. § 42-607. When the Berrymans purchased the ranch in 1965, they evidently learned of the 1938 deed distributing the Sadie Beecher lands and water and Mr.”
Clear Springs Foods, Inc. v. Spackman, 252 P.3d 71 (Idaho 2011).
· cites it 2× “Dreher require the local watermaster to administer water rights as required by Idaho Code § 42-607 in order to supply Blue Lakes with water under its senior rights.”
R.T. Nahas Co. v. Hulet, 752 P.2d 625 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 10× “Idaho Code § 42-607 does not alter the doctrine of prior appropriation as applied to private water right disputes.”
State v. Nelson, 951 P.2d 943 (Idaho 1998).
· cites it 2× “I.C. § 42-607 (1997). Additionally, we conclude that the General Provisions provided by I.”
State v. Hall, 413 P.2d 685 (Idaho 1966).
· cites it 4× “*489 It is the duty of a watermaster “to distribute the waters of the public stream, streams or water supply, comprising his water district, among the several ditches taking water therefrom according to the prior rights of each respectively, in whole or in part, and to shut and…”
Olson v. Bedke, 555 P.2d 156 (Idaho 1976).
· cites it 2× “” Regarding the Raft River waters claim, it is provided in I.C. § 42-607 that, “So long as a duly elected watermaster is charged with the administration of the waters within a water district, no water user within such district can adversely possess the right of any other water…”
Jones v. Big Lost River Irrigation Dist., 459 P.2d 1009 (Idaho 1969).
· cites it 2× “The duties of a water master are to determine decrees, regulate flow of streams and to transfer the water of decreed rights to the appropriate diversion points, I.C. § 42-607. The water master is not the agent of the water company or water user, but is a ministerial officer.”
Boise-Kuna Irrigation Dist. v. Gross, 801 P.2d 1291 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990).
· cites it 2× “Following this hearing, the district court determined that factual allegations made by Gross would also support a claim for a water right acquired by appropriation and beneficial use of water and that an amended counterclaim should be filed, containing this additional Count.”
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.