42-501. LEGISLATIVE INTENT. In the landmark case of Joyce Livestock Company v. United States of America, 144 Idaho 1, 156 P.3d 502 (2007), the Idaho Supreme Court held that an agency of the federal government cannot obtain a stockwater right under Idaho law, unless it actually owns livestock and puts the water to beneficial use.
In Joyce, the court held that the United States:
"bases its claim upon the constitutional method of appropriation. That method requires that the appropriator actually apply the water to a beneficial use. Since the United States has not done so, the district court did not err in denying its claimed water rights."
The court also held that federal ownership or management of the land alone does not qualify it for stockwater rights. It opined:
"The United States claimed instream water rights for stock watering based upon its ownership and control of the public lands coupled with the Bureau of Land Management’s comprehensive management of public lands under the Taylor Grazing Act…The argument of the United States reflects a misunderstanding of water law…As the United States has held, Congress has severed the ownership of federal lands from the ownership of water rights in nonnavigable waters located on such lands."
The court went on to state:
"Under Idaho Law, a landowner does not own a water right obtained by an appropriator using the land with the landowner’s permission unless the appropriator was acting as agent of the owner in obtaining that water right…If the water right was initiated by the lessee, the right is the lessee’s property, unless the lessee was acting as the agent of the owner…The Taylor Grazing Act expressly recognizes that ranchers could obtain their own water rights on federal land."
A rancher is not unwittingly acting as an agent of a federal agency simply by grazing livestock on federally managed lands when he files for and receives a stockwater right.
It is the intent of the Legislature to codify and enhance these important points of law from the Joyce case to protect Idaho stockwater right holders from encroachment by the federal government in navigable and nonnavigable waters.
Further, in order to comply with the Joyce decision, it is the intent of the Legislature that stockwater rights acquired in a manner contrary to the Joyce decision are subject to forfeiture.
History:
[42-501, added 2017, ch. 178, sec. 2, p. 408; am. 2018, ch. 320, sec. 1, p. 747.]
Copyright ©2024 LegalFix. All rights reserved. LegalFix is not a law firm, is not licensed to practice law, and does not provide legal advice, services, or representation. The information on this website is an overview of the legal plans you can purchase—or that may be provided by your employer as an employee benefit or by your credit union or other membership group as a membership benefit.
LegalFix provides its members with easy access to affordable legal services through a network of independent law firms. LegalFix, its corporate entity, and its officers, directors, employees, agents, and contractors do not provide legal advice, services, or representation—directly or indirectly.
The articles and information on the site are not legal advice and should not be relied upon—they are for information purposes only. You should become a LegalFix member to get legal services from one of our network law firms.
You should not disclose confidential or potentially incriminating information to LegalFix—you should only communicate such information to your network law firm.
The benefits and legal services described in the LegalFix legal plans are not always available in all states or with all plans. See the legal plan Benefit Overview and the more comprehensive legal plan contract during checkout for coverage details in your state.
Use of this website, the purchase of legal plans, and access to the LegalFix networks of law firms are subject to the LegalFix Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.