Premium
Control of Groundwater Use Held to Be Constitutional
Publication year - 1988
Publication title -
journal ‐ american water works association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.466
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1551-8833
pISSN - 0003-150X
DOI - 10.1002/j.1551-8833.1988.tb03000.x
Subject(s) - irrigation , legislature , groundwater , capital investment , land tenure , investment (military) , law , water resource management , capital (architecture) , irrigation management , business , political science , environmental science , geography , finance , politics , agriculture , engineering , archaeology , ecology , geotechnical engineering , biology
An Arizona appellate court ruled that a 1980 state law requires that, in order for a landowner to be permitted to irrigate under the management law, he must be able to show either actual irrigation or a substantial capital investment for the subjugation of the land for an irrigation purpose within the five‐year period preceding the designation of the INA (irrigation nonexpansion area). The court also said that the landowners in this case had no vested right to use the groundwater under their land for irrigation, and, thus, their use of the groundwater had always been subject to modification by the legislature.