That any artesian conservancy district which has heretofore been organized, or may be hereafter organized, as provided by law, shall in addition to the powers granted to such districts have the right, power and authority to protest or object to any application made to the state engineer to appropriate any waters included within the boundaries of such conservancy district which may be subject to appropriation as provided by law, and to protest or object to any application to the state engineer to change the location of any well or to change the use of waters for any purpose other than that for which originally granted, where it is determined by resolution of the board of directors of such district that the granting of such proposed application would interfere with any existing water rights or program of such conservancy district for the conservation of the waters sought to be appropriated, and such district shall have the right to appeal to the district court from the decision of the state engineer within the time and manner provided by law for appeals from such decisions.

History: Laws 1941, ch. 98, § 3; 1941 Comp., § 77-1324; 1953 Comp., § 75-13-24.

Bracketed material. — The bracketed material was inserted by the compiler and is not part of the law.

Cross references. — For appropriation and changes in use of waters upon application to state engineer, see 72-5-1 NMSA 1978.

For appeals to district court, see 72-7-1 to 72-7-3 NMSA 1978.

For procedures governing administrative appeals to the district court, see Rule 1-074 NMRA.

For scope of review of the district court, see Zamora v. Village of Ruidoso Downs, 120 N.M. 778, 907 P.2d 182 (1995).

District has duty to participate in litigation affecting owners' rights. — When vested water rights of owners of the district is in question, the district certainly has not only standing but a duty to participate in litigation affecting those rights. State ex rel. Reynolds v. Lewis, 1973-NMSC-035, 84 N.M. 768, 508 P.2d 577.

Section does not exclude suit regarding well drilled outside district. — Though an artesian conservancy district has a legal remedy provided expressly by statute for opposing application for appropriation of waters made to the state engineer where appropriation is within the district, it is not precluded from seeking injunctive relief against use of water from a well which is drilled without such permit outside territorial boundaries of the district and which taps waters of the artesian basin that underlies the district. Pecos Valley Artesian Conservancy Dist. v. Peters, 1945-NMSC-029, 50 N.M. 165, 173 P.2d 490.