Oregon State Bar Bulletin — JANUARY 2009
Letters

Clarifying Fort Vannoy Irrigation District Decision
I am concerned that the interesting article "Navigating Water Law in Oregon" (November 2008) contains a critically incomplete discussion of the Oregon Supreme Court’s decision in Fort Vannoy Irrigation District v. Water Resources Commission and Ken-Wal Farms, a case that I argued on behalf of the district.

The article overlooks that the main issue in the case was determining the "holder of any water use subject to transfer" under ORS 540.9 who would be authorized to change the diversion points associated with water rights established in certificates that had been issued to the district. The court held the "holder" was the district. Consequently, Ken-Wal Farms, a landowner within and a patron of the district, could not change the diversion point for a portion of the water without the district’s consent.

The court’s opinion extensively discussed the historical background of irrigation and water law in the American West and Oregon in particular, as well as other current and former Oregon statutes. It concluded that the district was the "holder" of the certificated water rights because the ownership interest in those rights vested in the district as trustee for all of its patrons upon issuance of the certificates. Ken-Wal’s ownership of a portion of the appurtenant land did not equate to ownership of the certificated
water rights.

In defending its water rights, the district was performing its duties as trustee to protect the beneficial interests of all of its patrons and to fulfill the statutes discussed in the court’s opinion.

Emil R. Berg
Boise, Idaho

We Love Letters
The Bulletin welcomes letters. In general, letters should pertain to recent articles, columns or other letters and should be limited to 250 words. Other things to keep in mind:

Letters must be addressed directly "To the editor." No reprints of letters addressed to other publications, to other individuals, to whom it may concern, etc., will be considered for publication.

Preference will be given to letters in response to either letters to the editor, articles or columns recently published in the Bulletin.

Letters must be signed. No unsigned or anonymous letters will be printed. The executive director may waive this requirement, if such waiver is requested.

Letters from Oregon State Bar members receive top priority for publication in the next available issue. When responses occur over several issues, the editor reserves the right to cease printing letters on the subject in question.Letters may not promote individual products, services or political candidates. All letters must comply with the guidelines of Keller v. State Bar of California in that they must be germane to the purpose of regulating the legal profession or improving the quality of the legal services available to the people of Oregon.

Letters to the editor may be edited for grammatical errors, style or length, or in cases where language or information is deemed unsuitable or inappropriate for publication. Profane or obscene language will not be accepted.

The Bulletin will not publish letters containing language constituting an attack upon an individual, group or organization.

The Bulletin strives to print as many letters as possible. Therefore, brevity is important, and preference will be given to letters that are 250 words or less. The editor reserves the right to select or withhold letters for publication, and to edit any and all letters chosen for publication. The authors of rejected letters will be notified in writing by the editor.

Send letters to: Editor, OSB Bulletin, P.O. Box 231935, Tigard, OR 97281


return to top
return to Table of Contents