Joyce Livestock Co. v. United States, 144 Idaho 1

Summary

The Idaho Supreme Court considered competing instream stockwatering rights claimed by Joyce Livestock Company and the United States on federal rangeland. The court held that Joyce Livestock's predecessors could acquire water rights under Idaho's constitutional appropriation method by applying water to the beneficial use of watering livestock, without exclusive access to the federal land or a diversion from the water source. It vacated the priority-date determination and remanded for redetermination, while affirming denial of the United States' water-right claim and Joyce Livestock's attorney-fee requests.

Holdings

1. An appropriator may obtain a water right in nonnavigable water located on federal land without having exclusive access to the federal land or water source.
2. Under Idaho's constitutional method of appropriation, no diversion from a natural watercourse or diversion device is required to establish a valid appropriative water right for stockwatering.
3. Joyce Livestock's predecessors acquired water rights on federal land by applying water to the beneficial use of watering livestock; no additional evidence of an intent to obtain a legally recognized water right was required.
4. Water rights acquired by the predecessors on federal grazing land were appurtenant to their deeded ranch properties.
5. An appurtenant water right passes with the conveyed real property unless it is expressly reserved in the deed or clear evidence shows that the parties intended the grantor to reserve it.
6. The district court erred by requiring historical documents or grazing-permit applications acknowledging the water rights and by failing to determine where the predecessors actually grazed their livestock. The priority determination was vacated and remanded for redetermination consistent with the opinion.
7. The United States did not acquire the claimed instream stockwater rights because it did not itself apply the water to the beneficial use of watering livestock, and the ranchers were not shown to have acted as its agents.
8. 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d) does not authorize state courts to award attorney fees against the United States.
9. Joyce Livestock was not entitled to attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-121 because the United States presented legitimate legal issues.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an appropriator may acquire a water right in nonnavigable water located on federal land without exclusive access to the land or water source.
2. Whether, under Idaho's constitutional method of appropriation, stockwatering can establish a water right without diversion from the natural watercourse.
3. Whether Joyce Livestock's predecessors acquired water rights by watering livestock on federal rangeland and whether those rights were appurtenant to their patented ranch properties.
4. Whether appurtenant water rights pass with conveyed real property absent express reservation or clear evidence of an intent to reserve them.
5. Whether the district court correctly determined the priority dates of Joyce Livestock's water rights.
6. Whether the United States acquired instream stockwater rights through ownership and management of federal rangeland or through permission granted to ranchers.
7. Whether the Idaho Supreme Court or an Idaho district court may award attorney fees against the United States under 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d).
8. Whether Joyce Livestock was entitled to attorney fees under Idaho Code § 12-121 or on appeal.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded