43 U.S.C. § 949
Use for canal or ditch only
Nothing in sections 946 to 949 of this title shall authorize such canal or ditch company to occupy such right of way except for the purpose of said canal or ditch, and then only so far as may be necessary for the construction, maintenance, and care of said canal or ditch.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1931–2024 · leading case: Bijou Irrigation Dist. v. Empire Club, 804 P.2d 175 (Colo. 1991).
Bijou Irrigation Dist. v. Empire Club, 804 P.2d 175 (Colo. 1991). “The cited statute, as now codified at 43 U.S.C. § 949 (1988), provides: Nothing in sections 946 to 949 of this title shall authorize such canal or ditch company to occupy such right of way except for the purpose of said canal or ditch, and then only so far as may be necessary…”
Rehwalt v. Am. Falls Reservoir Dist. 2, 550 P.2d 137 (Idaho 1976). “The Court noted that the easement, created by an act of Congress in March, 1891 ( 43 U.S.C.A. § 949 ), was expressly limited to create “no greater burden [upon the servient estate] than reasonably necessary.”
Pine River Irrigation Dist. v. United States, 656 F. Supp. 2d 1298 (D. Colo. 2009). “That nothing in this act [ 43 U.S.C. §§ 946-949 ] shall authorize such canal or ditch company to occupy such right of way except for the purpose of said canal or ditch, and then only so far as may be necessary for the construction, maintenance, and care of said canal or ditch.”
Twin Falls Canal Co. v. Am. Falls Reservoir Dist. No. 2, 49 F.2d 632 (D. Idaho 1931). “Some say that the additional 1,700 second feet when placed in the river would cause greater pressure upon the dam, and cause confusion and complications in its operation, while others say no.”
Smith v. Tumalo Irrigation Dist. (9th Cir. 2024). “First, Plaintiffs have not presented evidence that TID’s project involves digging or installing pipelines more than 50 feet below the floors of the canals and laterals.”
Bijou Irrigation Dist. v. Barnett, 832 P.2d 713 (Colo. 1992). “The District possesses an exclusive easement to store water in and operate the Empire Reservoir, including those lands within 50 feet of the marginal limits of the Reservoir, for the sole purposes of irrigation and those other uses specified in 43 U.S.C. § 949 . 2. The…”
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.