Utah Code
Utah Code § 73-1-3 (2026)
Beneficial use basis of right to use
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
UT-LEGle.utah.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and the limit of all rights to the use of water in this state.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 21
cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1961–2025 · leading case: Green River Canal Co. v. Thayn, 2003 UT 50 (Utah 2003).
Green River Canal Co. v. Thayn, 2003 UT 50 (Utah 2003). “¶ 18 The first and most critical issue we must address is whether the trial court was correct in ruling that Thayn breached the 1952 Agreement and Amendment when he began using his 600 cfs water right to drive his new hydroelectric power facility.”
Bingham v. Roosevelt City Corp., 2010 UT 37 (Utah 2010). “See Utah Code Ann. § 73-1-3 (2009); see also Salt Lake City v.”
Bonham v. Morgan, 788 P.2d 497 (Utah 1989). “§ 73-1-1 (1980), “[a]ll waters in this state, whether above or under the ground are hereby declared to be the property of the public, subject to all existing rights to the use thereof,” and of Utah Code Ann. § 73-1-3 (1980), “[bjeneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and…”
Delta Canal Co. v. Frank Vincent Fam. Ranch, LC, 2013 UT 69 (Utah 2013). “We next conclude that the exception located in Utah Code section 73-1-4(3)(f)(i) (subsequent to 2002 amendments) is a codification of the physical-causes exception-not a rule that forfeiture can never occur when a water right is not fully satisfied.”
East Jordan Irrigation Co. v. Morgan, 860 P.2d 310 (Utah 1993). “Third, in accordance with the beneficial use principle, one forfeits his or her *318 rights to water after failing to use it for five years.”
Platt v. Town of Torrey, 949 P.2d 325 (Utah 1997). “See Utah Code Ann. § 73-1-3 ("Beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure, and the limit of all rights to use the water in this state.”
J.J.N.P. Co. v. State Ex Rel. Div. of Wildlife Resources, 655 P.2d 1133 (Utah 1982). “) Thus, individuals have no ownership interest as such in natural waters, only the right to put the water to certain uses.”
Longley v. Leucadia Fin. Corp., 2000 UT 69 (Utah 2000). “To assure the equitable distribution and the most efficient use of this scarce commodity, the legislature has mandated procedures that include the public in the consideration of requests to the State Engineer for extensions of time on change applications made more than fourteen…”
Butler, Crockett & Walsh Dev. Corp. v. Pinecrest Pipeline Operating Co., 98 P.3d 1 (Utah 2004). “" Utah Code Ann. § 73-1-3 (2003). " 'No one can acquire the right to use more water than is necessary, with reasonable effi-clency, to satisfy his beneficial requirements.”
Eskelsen v. Town of Perry, 819 P.2d 770 (Utah 1991). “See Utah Code Ann. § 73-1-3 (“Beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and the limit of all rights to the use of water in this state.”
Arave v. Pineview West Water Co., 2020 UT 67 (Utah 2020). “This objective becomes an important consideration when a junior appropriator’s diversion interferes with a senior appropriator’s water right.”
In Re Uintah Basin, 2006 UT 19 (Utah 2006). “§ 73-1-1 (2004) (emphasis added). Of equal importance is the second fundamental principle: "Beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure and the limit of all rights to the use of the water in this state.”
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.