State explains Gold Wash adjudication process, deadlines and what residents must do

Chase McDonald, assistant state engineer for adjudication at the Utah Division of Water Rights, told a packed public meeting that the division is conducting a general adjudication for the Gold Wash area (Area 81, Book 4) to document and, where appropriate, quantify water rights.

The meeting focused on how the adjudication works, who must file a claim, and the schedule: the office will send a notice to file claims (May 15), claimants will have 90 days to file with a one-time 30-day extension if requested in writing during that initial 90-day window, and the office aims to finish a preliminary list of unclaimed rights by February 2026 and publish a proposed determination by December 2027.

McDonald said the adjudication is a court action under state law that joins water users with the state engineer to “evaluate the nature and extent of all of the water rights in each drainage” and to bring pre‑statutory and otherwise unrecorded rights onto the record. He emphasized that the process is governed by Utah statute and that the Division’s goal is to “increase the clarity of the water rights picture.”

Why the summons: McDonald explained that summonses and newspaper notices are sent to every known water‑right holder on the Division’s records and to property owners inside the division boundary to ensure people who need to participate are aware. He said the Division currently has 545 water‑right entries for the Gold Wash area on its records but expects additional pre‑statutory claims to be identified during the filing period.

Who must file: McDonald said any owner of a water right in the area — including those with an approved application that has not yet been perfected — should file a water‑user claim during the claim period. He reiterated that irrigation‑company shareholders typically do not need to file individual claims because irrigation companies file on their portfolio of rights, though shareholders may file if they wish. Municipalities and irrigation companies are expected to file claims for their portfolios.

What is adjudicated: The Division will include “perfected” rights in the adjudication — certificated rights, decreed rights and diligence claims. The staff will review claims, perform file reviews and field inspections to verify points of diversion, beneficial uses and places of use, and then prepare a State Engineer’s recommendation for each claim. McDonald said those recommendations are a courtesy the Division provides to explain its findings; they will be mailed to claimants and later published in the proposed determination submitted to the court.

Consequences for unclaimed rights: McDonald warned that water rights that appear on the Division’s records but receive no claim may be compiled into a publicly published list of unclaimed rights, filed with the court and, after any objection period and court action, decreed abandoned. He stressed that abandoned or unclaimed paper rights are not auctioned or sold by the state; rather, in practical terms the water that was historically diverted would be available downstream and could be obtained by others under Utah’s priority (first‑in‑time) system if the area is open to new appropriations.

Forfeiture and review windows: McDonald explained that forfeiture for non‑use is a statutory concept in Utah. If a portion of a right has not been put to beneficial use for seven years it may be subject to forfeiture and the Division may look back at prior use when preparing recommendations; he also noted staff can review up to a 15‑year period in certain circumstances. He urged claimants to provide information if they disagree with the Division’s recommendation and reminded the public that an objection period to the proposed determination exists through the court process.

Practical help and website tools: McDonald said the Division will help claimants fill out forms and will file claims with the court as a courtesy. He demonstrated the Division’s public web tools (waterrights.utah.gov) — map search, water‑right records, scan documents and the adjudication status page — and pointed out where to download the presentation and file an online water‑user claim. He also identified on‑site staff (John Hagood, Skyler and others from the regional office in Cedar City) who would remain after the presentation to help with specific questions.

Questions from the public covered topics including how boundaries were drawn, the relationship between local adjudication and the Colorado River Compact, whether unclaimed water becomes state property (it does not), sale or transfer procedures during adjudication (transactions may proceed; the Division reviews records before final determination), and whether the Division sends certified mail (it does not). McDonald repeatedly urged anyone “in doubt” about whether to file a water‑user claim to file one.

Ending: McDonald closed by repeating contact options for the adjudication staff and saying the Division will hold further public meetings after publishing the list of unclaimed rights and the proposed determination to explain the objection process and next steps. Staff remained after the meeting to help attendees complete claims or answer site‑specific questions.