1866 Not a Grant for water |
1866 Not a Grant for water |
Jul 3 2014, 04:07 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Rock Bar! Group: Members Posts: 434 Joined: 12-February 09 Member No.: 6,851 |
It's better than a grant.
It's a pre-existing right of possession, a valid claim, requiring protecton of government. http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getc...8&invol=645 The Mining Act of 1866 was not itself a grant of water rights pursuant to federal law. Instead, as this Court observed, the Act was "`a voluntary recognition of a preexisting right of possession, constituting a valid claim to its continued use.'" United States v. Rio Grande Dam & Irrig. Co., supra, at 705. Congress intended "to recognize as valid the customary law with respect to the use of water which had grown up among the occupants of the public land under the peculiar necessities of their condition." 10 Basey v. Gallagher, 20 Wall. 670, 684 (1875). See Broder v. Water Co., supra, at 276; Jennison v. Kirk, 98 U.S. 453, 459 -461 (1879). 11 [438 U.S. 645, 657] |
|
|
Jul 4 2014, 04:58 AM
Post
#2
|
|
russau Group: Members Posts: 2,841 Joined: 4-December 03 From: st.louis missouri Member No.: 43 |
Thankyou Mr. M.E.G. and have a Happy 4th of July!
|
|
|
Jul 4 2014, 05:37 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Master Mucker! Group: Members Posts: 1,282 Joined: 13-January 14 From: Lakewood, Colorado Member No.: 116,305 |
Good to know! Thank you for sharing this nugget of knowledge!
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 29th April 2024 - 12:34 AM |