The unauthorized use of water to which another person is entitled, or the willful waste of surface or underground water to the detriment of another or the public, shall be a misdemeanor. It shall also be a misdemeanor to begin to carry on any construction of works for storing or carrying water until after the issuance of permit to appropriate such waters provided that management of water for beneficial use shall not be considered waste.
History: Laws 1907, ch. 49, § 48; Code 1915, § 5707; C.S. 1929, § 151-160; Laws 1941, ch. 126, § 20; 1941 Comp., § 77-704; 1953 Comp., § 75-7-4; Laws 1973, ch. 283, § 1.
ANNOTATIONSCross references. — For penalty for violation of this section, see 72-8-6 NMSA 1978.
Jurisdiction in suit for injunction. — Statutes which confer upon state engineer general supervision over state waters and appropriation and distribution thereof do not oust courts of jurisdiction to protect individual rights in use of water, so that court retained jurisdiction of suit by irrigation district for injunction against unlawful appropriation of water by riparian owners above district's works and reservoirs. Carlsbad Irrigation Dist. v. Ford, 1942-NMSC-042, 46 N.M. 335, 128 P.2d 1047.
Joinder of riparian owners diverting water. — Where an irrigation district sought to enjoin alleged unlawful appropriation of water by riparian owners whose lands were located above district's reservoirs and works, it could properly join as defendants several riparian owners who made diversion even though there was no concert or unity of design between them. Carlsbad Irrigation Dist. v. Ford, 1942-NMSC-042, 46 N.M. 335, 128 P.2d 1047.
Decree proper. — Since decree enjoined riparian owners from appropriating waters above irrigation district's reservoirs and works, but also provided that nothing should prevent such owners from applying to state engineer for water rights, it indicated sufficiently that upon proper showing owners' application for modification of decree would be heard by court, and was not erroneous under contention that it prevented any use of flood waters. Carlsbad Irrigation Dist. v. Ford, 1942-NMSC-042, 46 N.M. 335, 128 P.2d 1047.
Venue not proven. — Absent evidence of county in which defendant committed acts of unauthorized use of water charged, his conviction would be reversed for failure to prove venue. State v. Glasscock, 1966-NMSC-105, 76 N.M. 367, 415 P.2d 56, overruled to the extent case suggests that venue is not waivable, State v. Lopez, 1973-NMSC-041, 84 N.M. 805, 508 P.2d 1292.
Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 78 Am. Jur. 2d Waters § 326.
Exploitation or waste of water, constitutionality of statute limiting or controlling, 24 A.L.R. 307, 78 A.L.R. 834.
Waste, statutory regulations to prevent, 55 A.L.R. 1483, 109 A.L.R. 395, 109 A.L.R. 412.
94 C.J.S. Waters § 313.