N.M. Stat. » Chapter 72 — Water Law
New Mexico Statutes

N.M. Stat. § 72-4-13 (2026)

Hydrographic survey of state stream systems; duty of state

✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NM-LEGnmonesource.com JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

engineer; dam and reservoir sites; cooperation with United States. The state engineer shall make hydrographic surveys and investigations of each stream system and source of water supply in the state, beginning with those most used for irrigation, and obtaining and recording all available data for the determination, development and adjudication of water supply of the state including the location and survey of suitable sites for dams and reservoirs and the determination of the approximate water supply, capacity and cost of each. He is authorized to cooperate with the agencies of the United States engaged in similar surveys and investigations and in the construction of works for the development and use of the water supply of the state, expending for such purposes any money available for the work of his office, and may accept and use in connection with the operations of his office the results of the agencies of the United States.

History: Laws 1907, ch. 49, § 19; Code 1915, § 5671; C.S. 1929, § 151-118; 1941 Comp., § 77-402; 1953 Comp., § 75-4-2; Laws 1977, ch. 254, § 94; 1982, ch. 10, § 6.

ANNOTATIONS

Cross references. — For the state engineer, see 72-2-1 NMSA 1978.

Section speaks of future. — This section and Section 72-4-1 NMSA 1978 (prior to 1909 amendment) speak of future and have no application to water rights acquired prior to passage of act. Pueblo of Isleta v. Tondre, 1913-NMSC-067, 18 N.M. 388, 137 P. 86.

Hydrographic surveys prepared by United States. — The state engineer may make use of all or part of a hydrographic survey prepared by the United States, but even if he does not accept the United States survey, it still may be offered into evidence at a state court trial involving the general adjudication of water rights. U.S. ex rel. Acoma & Laguna Indian Pueblos v. Bluewater-Toltec Irrigation Dist., 580 F. Supp. 1434 (D.N.M. 1984), aff'd, 806 F.2d 986 (10th Cir. 1986).

Law reviews. — For article, "Water Rights Problems in the Upper Rio Grande Watershed and Adjoining Areas," see 11 Nat. Resources J. 48 (1971).

Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 25 Am. Jur. 2d Drains and Drainage Districts §§ 22, 36.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2021 · leading case: United States v. City of Las Cruces, 289 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. City of Las Cruces, 289 F.3d 1170 (10th Cir. 2002). “” See generally N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 72-4-15 to -19 (1978).”
United States v. Bluewater-Toltec Irrigation Dist., 580 F. Supp. 1434 (D.N.M. 1984). · cites it 4× “N.M.StatAnn. §§ 72-4-13 and 72-4-17 (1982 Supp.”
City of Las Vegas v. Oman, 796 P.2d 1121 (N.M. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “” See NMSA 1978, § 72-4-13 (Repl.1985). Thereafter, the state “should insofar as possible join known claimants to the right to use surface waters of the Gallinas River drainage to the Pecos River adjudication, and proceed to offer judgment against itself and in favor of such…”
Tri-State Generation & Transmission Ass'n v. D'Antonio, 2011-NMCA-015, 249 P.3d 932. · cites it 2× “Although licenses are not commensurate with adjudication decrees, and license rights are still subject to adjudication — see NMSA 1978, §§ 72-4-13 (1982), -15 — licenses and post inter se adjudication decrees can be distinguished from the other forms of evidence enumerated in 19.”
In re United States of Am. & State of NM v. A & R Prods., No. 6:01-cv-00072 (D.N.M. Nov. 12, 2021). · cites it 4× “Should the Court certify the following question to the New Mexico Supreme Court: May an adjudication court, pursuant to NMSA 1978, §§ 72-4-13 through 20, adjudicate a water right in an amount that accounts for the reasonable, continuous expansion of beneficial use of water…”
State ex rel. State Eng'r v. Faykus (N.M. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 2× “Instead, Respondents contend it was the State’s responsibility to discover and produce the tax records at issue, pursuant to NMSA 1978, §§ 72-4-13 (1982), -15, and -17.”
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.