16 U.S.C. § 481
Use of waters
All waters within the boundaries of national forests may be used for domestic, mining, milling, or irrigation purposes, under the laws of the State wherein such national forests are situated, or under the laws of the United States and the rules and regulations established thereunder.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1958–2025 · leading case: United States v. City & County of Denver Ex Rel. Board of Water Commissioners
United States v. City & County of Denver Ex Rel. Board of Water Commissioners (1982)
“It interpreted 16 U.S.C. § 481 (1976), a provision of the Organic Act for the national forest system, as establishing that the availability of water supplies for private domestic, mining, *14 milling, and agricultural use was the overriding purpose of all national forests.”
United States v. New Mexico (1978)
“16 U. S. C. § 481 (1976 ed.). [24] There is no indication in the legislative histories of any of the forest Acts that Congress foresaw any need for the Forest Service to allocate water for stockwatering purposes, a task to which state law was well suited.”
Salazar v. Buono (2010)
“See note following 16 U. S. C. § 481 (listing officially designated national memorials, including the National D-Day Memorial and the Vietnam Veterans Memorial).”
Avondale Irrigation District v. North Idaho Properties, Inc. (1978)
“11 , 36 (1897) (codified at 16 U.S.C. § 481 ). [11] "Nothing herein shall be construed as prohibiting the egress or ingress of actual settlers residing within the boundaries of such reservations, or from crossing the same to and from their property or homes; and such wagon roads…”
Hage v. United States (1996)
“The issues which this court must determine are: what water rights do plaintiffs own, if any, which could be subject to a taking? And, whether under the facts presented, did government regulation of water usage in the Toiyabe National Forest effectively take plaintiffs’ water…”
United States v. Jesse (1987)
“See 16 U.S.C. § 481 (1985) (“All waters within the .”
Walker v. United States (2005)
“r doctrine and the effect of the Organic Administration Act of 1897 providing that “[a]ll waters within the boundaries of national forests may be used for domestic, mining, milling, or irrigation purposes, under the laws of the State wherein such national forests are situated,…”
Adams v. United States (1993)
“The Forest Service still has the authority to reasonably regulate the Adamses’ easement. V The Adamses have a nonexclusive easement that guarantees access to their property under the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act.”
United States v. Fallbrook Public Utility District (1958)
“36 , 16 U.S.C.A. § 481 (1952); Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of June 17, 1902, 32 Stat 390, 43 U.”
Purgatory Recreation I v. United States (2025)
“) We conclude that this request must be dismissed for lack of prudential ripeness because Purgatory must first avail itself of the procedure for just compensation afforded by the federal Tucker Act before it can bring a claim for declaratory relief.”
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.