Utah Supreme Court affirms denial of Waterhorse export; state export statute upheld
Loading...
Summary
The Utah Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the denial of Waterhorse Resources’ application to export 55,000 acre‑feet from the Green River, ruling that Utah’s export statute applies and that Waterhorse had not shown enforceable rights or approvals in Colorado to demonstrate beneficial use.
Sarah Schechter of the Attorney General’s office briefed the board on a unanimous Utah Supreme Court decision affirming the district court’s denial of Waterhorse Resources’ application to appropriate and export 55,000 acre‑feet from the Green River (Daggett County) for use outside Utah. The court held that the export statute does not conflict with the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact and that Utah law governs assessment of whether exported water can be beneficially used in a receiving state.
Schechter summarized the court’s rationale: Waterhorse had not filed any Colorado water‑use application or obtained Colorado approvals, nor shown a legally enforceable right to use the water in Colorado or that depletions would be appropriately accounted against Colorado’s compact allocation. Because the export statute’s requirements were unmet, the court declined to resolve other arguments and affirmed that interstate compact provisions do not automatically authorize cross‑border diversions without satisfying state export statutes.
Board members were told this ruling reinforces the state engineer’s authority to apply Utah statutes to export proposals and underscores the need for concrete, enforceable arrangements with receiving states before a Utah export would be approved.
This was presented as a significant legal precedent for state water management; no board action was required at the briefing.
