United States of America v. Walker River Irrigation

Filing 1745

ORDER TEMPORARILY MODIFYING WALKER RIVER DECREE RE PERMIT NO. 90920-T as detailed herein - Signed by Chief Judge Miranda M. Du on 9/30/2022. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - CJS)

Download PDF
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF NEVADA 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 4 Plaintiff, 5 WALKER RIVER PAIUTE TRIBE, Plaintiff - Intervenor. 6 7 8 9 10 11 v. IN EQUITY NO. C-125 CASE NO: 3:73-CV-00125-MMD-CSD ORDER TEMPORARILY MODIFYING WALKER RIVER DECREE RE PERMIT NO. 90920-T WALKER RIVER IRRIGATION DISTRICT, a corporation, et al., Defendants. The Walker River Decree is hereby temporarily modified in accordance with Permit 12 No. 90920-T issued by the Nevada State Engineer on February 24, 2022. 13 NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that, 14 as set forth in Nevada State Engineer Permit No. 90920-T, the Walker River Decree is 15 hereby modified to reflect the temporary changes in the manner of use and place of use to 16 instream flow for wildlife purposes in the Walker River and Walker Lake of Decreed water 17 right Claim Nos. 41 and 229. This modification does not make any changes to the listed 18 owner of the water rights claims, or any portions thereof, as set forth in the Walker River 19 Decree, even though the ownership of the water rights claims has changed since the entry 20 of this Decree. 21 22 Claim 41/229, Fallon, Ira, Successor to Mrs. Sarah Jane Rallens, et al., portion changed to instream flows for wildlife purposes. 23 As set forth in Permit No. 90920-T, the portion of water right Claim 41/229 in the 24 table below shall be administered by the Water Master when in priority as shown in the 25 second column (year of priority) and third column (amount at point of non-diversion) of the 26 table. Thereafter, the Water Master shall administer and protect from diversion by others 27 at and downstream of the point of non-diversion the consumptive use portion, being 3.10 28 acre-feet per acre, which has been converted to flow measured in cubic feet per second as 1 1 shown in the fourth column (amount of consumptive use). At the Wabuska Gage, said 2 changed water right shall be administered in the Walker River and Weber Reservoir 3 through the Walker River Paiute Tribe reservation pursuant to the Lower Walker River 4 Conveyance Protocols, all as more fully set forth in Nevada State Engineer Ruling No. 6271, 5 the 2018 Ninth Circuit Decision and the terms of Permit No. 80700. The non-consumptive 6 use portion of the water rights shall be administered by the Water Master in her or his 7 discretion pursuant to the Walker River Decree and the 1953 Rules and Regulations for 8 the Distribution of Water on the Walker River Stream System, including to avoid conflict 9 with and injury to existing water rights at and downstream of the point of non-diversion 10 and to mitigate hydrologic system losses, from the point of non-diversion to the point or 11 points where the non-consumptive use portion historically returned to the Walker River 12 upstream of the Wabuska Gage. 13 14 15 16 17 Stream Year of Relative Priority Amount at Point of NonDiversion (in c.f.s. ) Amount of Consumptive Use (in c.f.s.) No. of Acres Formerly Irrigated Description of Place of Use Walker River from the Point of Non-Diversion, Walker 1874 6.410 1.462 229.17 through USGS Wabuska Gage, then through River 1880 1.540 0.819 128.35 Weber Reservoir into and including Walker Lake. 18 19 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED 20 That Permit No. 90920-T shall be administered in exactly the same fashion as the 21 Walker Basin Conservancy’s previously approved Permit Nos. 80700 and 88160–88162 22 using the Wabuska and Yerington Weir Gages and no special fees or costs may be assessed 23 against NDOW for its administration. 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 30thday of DATED this ____ September 2022. 26 27 28 DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?