A DIGEST OF LEGAL DECISIONS. 357 Water, diversion of. See Diversion of water. Water, personal property. See Personal property. Water right, co-extensive with ditch. See Appropriator's right co-extensive with his ditch. Water right, deed of, does not convey mill-site. A deed conveying the right to the use of the water of a river between certain points does not convey the land of a mill-site on the river. Robinson v. Imperial S. Mg. Co., 5 Nev., 44. Water right, transfer of. An executed contract which passed the equitable title to a ditch to which a water right was appurtenant, is sufficient to insure the grantee the rights for which he stipulated as against an adverse claimant. Ortman v. Dixon, 13 Cal., 33. The right to water acquired by appropriation is a species of realty, and requires for its transfer the same form and solemnity as is required for the conveyance of any other real estate. Barkley v. Tieleke, 2 Mont., 59; Smith v. O'Hara, 43 Cal., 371. Right to water acquired by appropriation may be transferred like other property. McDonald v. B. R. & A. W. & M. Co., 13 Cal., 220; Union Water Co. v. Crary 25 Cal., 504; Dalton v. Bowker, 8 Nev., 190. The right to the use of a water-course in the public mineral lands, and the right to divert and use the water taken therefrom acquired by appropriation, may be held, granted, abandoned, or lost by the same means as a right of the same character issuing out of lands to which a private title exists. Union Water Co. v. Crary, 25 Cal., 504. Water right, when an appurtenance. A right which secures to the owner of a tract of land water for irrigating or other purposes necessary to the beneficial enjoyment of the land becomes appurtenant to said land and passes by a conveyance thereof. Cave v. Crafts, 53 Cal., 135; Farmer v. Ukiah Water Co., 56 Cal., 11; Standart v. Round Valley Water Co., 77 Cal., 399. If the right to use the water were acquired by appropriation for the purpose of operating a mill on the stream, such right would pass by the transfer of said mill property to a vendee. McDonald v. B. R. & A. W. & M. Co., 13 Cal., 220. The water supply of a mill will ordinarily pass with a conveyance of the mill, but in order to do so it must belong to the mill, must be the property of the owner thereof. Ginocchio v. Amador C. & M. Co., 67 Cal., 493. The purchase by a mining company of a water ditch and rights appertaining thereto does not necessarily constitute said ditch and water rights appurtenances of the mining claim. Upon one who asserts that a ditch and water rights are appurtenant to a mining claim is cast the burden of proving that such is the fact. Quirk ". Falk, 47 Cal., 453. The right to water appropriated to irrigate a certain tract of land by one who had no title to said land, but was a mere trespasser, does not become appurtenant to the land, and does not pass to a purchaser from the owner of the land. Smith v. Logan, 18 Nev., 149. To entitle one to recover in an action in ejectment he must show that he is entitled to possession of the premises; but he is not required to show that he is entitled to the enjoyment of a stream of water running through the premises or that he was damaged by the diversion of it. Dilley v. Sherman, 2 Nev., 67. When a canal or aqueduct has been constructed in two separate parts by different contractors at different times, the two sections being fed in part from different sources, and the Supreme Court of the United States has decided that the two sections constitute separate and distinct works, the water supply of the one must be held not an appurtenance of the other section. Reynolds v. Hosmer, 51 Cal., 205. Water rights acquired under license to use. One who takes possession of water under a verbal license to use the same, during the time that the grantor did not need the use thereof, acquires no rights which could be sold and transferred to another. Fabian v. Collins, 3 Mont., 215. Water rights are real property. The right to running water may exist without private ownership of the soil upon the ground of prior appropriation. The right to water must be treated as a right running with the land and as a corporeal privilege bestowed upon the occupier or appropriator of the soil, and as such it has none of the characteristics of mere personality. Hill v. Newman, 5 Cal., 445. Water, use of, by those entitled may be regulated by a court of equity. It is within the power and authority of a court of equity to ascertain and deter mine the extent of the rights of property in water, flowing in a natural water-course, acquired by persons who hold and are entitled to them, and to regulate between or among them the use in the flow of the water in such a way as to maintain equality of rights in the enjoyment of the com mon property. Frey v. Lowden, 70 Cal., 550. 1 Miles of, in Weber, Utah, Cache, and Salt Lake Counties. 321, 323 126 123 124 121, 124, 125 127 .304, 305 33 61 122 126 49 322 304 142 149 124 123 322 126 123 127 66 29 61 304, 305 144 149 28 303, 304 327 124, 125 326 68, 69 323 123 126 Crops under irrigation- Alfalfa or Lucern..19, 39, 41, 43, 51, 55, 58, 60, 61, 62, 71, 77, 102, 121, 133, 315, 316, 333 |