Wash. Rev. Code » Title 90 · Chapter 90.14

Wash. Rev. Code § 90.14.020

Legislative declaration

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
The legislature finds that:
(1) Extensive uncertainty exists regarding the volume of private claims to water in the state;
(2) Such uncertainty seriously retards the efficient utilization and administration of the state's water resources, and impedes the fullest beneficial use thereof;
(3) A strong beneficial use requirement as a condition precedent to the continued ownership of a right to withdraw or divert water is essential to the orderly development of the state;
(4) Enforcement of the state's beneficial use policy is required by the state's rapid growth;
(5) All rights to divert or withdraw water, except riparian rights which do not diminish the quantity of water remaining in the source such as boating, swimming, and other recreational and aesthetic uses must be subjected to the beneficial use requirement;
(6) The availability for appropriation of additional water as a result of the requirements of this chapter will accelerate growth, development, and diversification of the economy of the state;
(7) Water rights will gain sufficient certainty of ownership as a result of this chapter to become more freely transferable, thereby increasing the economic value of the uses to which they are put, and augmenting the alienability of titles to land.
[ 1967 c 233 s 2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1985–2019 · leading case: Department of Ecology v. Adsit
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Department of Ecology v. Adsit (1985) wash · cites it 2× “RCW 90.14.020. The act, and its 1969 amendments, are the most recent developments of a trend since the inception of statehood to encourage the beneficial use of water through comprehensive cataloging and management of the waters of the state.”
R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Board (1999) wash “180 state that where water rights have not been beneficially used for five continuous years, or have been abandoned, “said right or portion thereof shall revert to the state, and the waters affected by said right shall become available for appropriation .”
City of Union Gap v. Department of Ecology (2008) washctapp “RCW 90.14.020(3) provides that “[a] strong beneficial use requirement as a condition precedent to the continued ownership of a right to withdraw or divert water is essential to the orderly development of the state .”
Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd. (2019) washctapp “RCW 90.14.020(3). Under Washington’s 1917 Water Rights Code, all unclaimed water belongs to the State of Washington.”
Pacific Land Partners, LLC v. Dept. of Ecology (2009) washctapp “The legislature intended "that water be beneficially used, and, if not, that water rights be returned to the state so that the water will be available for appropriation by others who will put the water to beneficial use.”
Pacific Land Partners, LLC v. Department of Ecology (2009) washctapp “As stated in RCW 90.14.020(3), the requirement that a person establish a strong beneficial use as a condition precedent to continued ownership of a water right “is essential to the orderly development of the state.”
City of Union Gap v. STATE DEPT. OF ECOLOGY (2008) washctapp “RCW 90.14.020(3) provides that "[a] strong beneficial use requirement as a condition precedent to the continued ownership of a right to withdraw or divert water is essential to the orderly development of the state.”
RD Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Bd. (1999) wash “180 state that where water rights have not been beneficially used for five continuous years, or have been abandoned, "said right or portion thereof shall revert to the state, and the waters affected by said right shall become available for appropriation.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.14.020(3) — 7 cases
R.D. Merrill Co. v. Pollution Control Hearings Board (1999) wash “180 state that where water rights have not been beneficially used for five continuous years, or have been abandoned, “said right or portion thereof shall revert to the state, and the waters affected by said right shall become available for appropriation .”
City of Union Gap v. Department of Ecology (2008) washctapp “RCW 90.14.020(3) provides that “[a] strong beneficial use requirement as a condition precedent to the continued ownership of a right to withdraw or divert water is essential to the orderly development of the state .”
Crown West Realty, LLC v. Pollution Control Hearings Bd. (2019) washctapp “RCW 90.14.020(3). Under Washington’s 1917 Water Rights Code, all unclaimed water belongs to the State of Washington.”
Pacific Land Partners, LLC v. Dept. of Ecology (2009) washctapp “The legislature intended "that water be beneficially used, and, if not, that water rights be returned to the state so that the water will be available for appropriation by others who will put the water to beneficial use.”
Pacific Land Partners, LLC v. Department of Ecology (2009) washctapp “As stated in RCW 90.14.020(3), the requirement that a person establish a strong beneficial use as a condition precedent to continued ownership of a water right “is essential to the orderly development of the state.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 90.14.020(5) — 1 case
Department of Ecology v. Adsit (1985) wash “RCW 90.14.020. The act, and its 1969 amendments, are the most recent developments of a trend since the inception of statehood to encourage the beneficial use of water through comprehensive cataloging and management of the waters of the 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.