Barron v. Idaho Department of Water Resources

In 1997, Charles Barron (plaintiff) applied to the Idaho Department of Water Resources (IDWR) (defendant) to transfer an existing water right in a creek. The original owners appropriated the right to irrigate 311 acres four miles below the diversion point, claiming the creek did not flow past that point after mid-July. A later owner appropriated a right to use groundwater to supplement the existing surface-water right. After someone else transferred half the surface-water right, Barron wanted to split the remaining half into two separate rights to irrigate two parcels of land. IDWR agent Jim Stanton recommended denying Barron’s transfer application, citing concerns with Barron’s right and potential harm to senior downstream users. Stanton’s memorandum stated that Shannon Wolf had leased the 311 acres for the last seven years and irrigated it solely with groundwater. The IDWR published notice of Barron’s application, and nobody protested, but the watermaster advised denial because of lack of water and potential harm to downstream users. The IDWR repeatedly requested supplemental information, specifically evidence of historic use. Barron provided an affidavit stating he had irrigated the 311 acres throughout the growing season in two recent years without Wolf’s knowledge and an affidavit from the other intended water-right recipient claiming he had used the right to irrigate other land during the 1980s. The affidavits lacked meaningful statements about the period of use, amounts diverted or consumed, or whether and how much groundwater was used to supplement the surface-water right. The IDWR denied the application, and the district court affirmed. Barron appealed.