In re Water Rights on Grande Ronde River

1 Citing case

  1. Re Rights to Waters of Silvies River

    237 P. 322 (Or. 1925)   Cited 24 times
    Describing pre-1909-code methods of providing notice

    The record indicates that this was done to protect the water rights of the claimant Pacific Livestock Company and not with the intent of waiving any right which the company formerly had. The act of applying for permits from the State Engineer was analogous to the posting of notices of appropriation under the statute prior to the enactment of the Water Code. A party having a right to the use of the water of a stream for the purpose of irrigating land by virtue of a prior appropriation, by organizing a corporation and participating in the posting and recording of a notice of appropriation in the name of such corporation, or posting notices of appropriation and recording the same in order to strengthen his rights in his own name, does not necessarily waive or relinquish his right to the water which he had prior to such posting of a notice: In re Grande Ronde River, 113 Or. 211 ( 232 P. 626); In re Hood River, 114 Or. 112 ( 227 P. 1065); Eldredge v. Mill Ditch Co., 90 Or. 590 ( 177 P. 939); Oregon Const. Co. v. Allen Ditch Co., 41 Or. 209 ( 69 P. 455, 93 Am. St. Rep. 701, note). The claimant Pacific Livestock Co. also cites upon this point Newport Water Co. v. Kellogg, 31 Idaho 574 ( 174 P. 602); Osgood v. El Dorado etc. Water Co., 56 Cal. 571.