Little v. Nampa-Meridian Irr. Dist.

Decision Date28 March 1960
Docket NumberNo. 8769,NAMPA-MERIDIAN,8769
Citation350 P.2d 740,82 Idaho 167
PartiesRalph LITTLE, L. J. Garner, E. C. Morehouse, Harold Huskey and Clifford Wilde, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v.IRRIGATION DISTRICT, and Dan Barker, William Wymer and Elmer Tiegs, as Directors of said Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, Defendants-Respondents.
CourtIdaho Supreme Court

Laurence N. Smith, Dean E. Miller, Caldwell, for appellants.

Anderson, Kaufman & Anderson, Boise, for respondents.

TAYLOR, Chief Justice.

Plaintiffs (appellants) are owners of lands within the boundaries of the defendant (respondent) Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. The tracts owned by plaintiffs are parts of lands within the district commonly known and referred to as 'Boise Project lands,' or 'Government Project lands,' hereinafter referred to as project lands.

Plaintiffs brought this action on behalf of themselves and other project land owners to compel the board of directors of the irrigation district to make its annual assessment for operation and maintenance uniform upon all lands within the district. The action is specifically concerned with the assessments made by the board of directors at its meeting on September 4, 1956. The assessment levied upon project lands was at a higher rate per acre for the same quantity of water delivered than the assessment levied upon 'Ridenbaugh lands.'

The Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District is comprised of approximately 27,000 acres of 'Ridenbaugh lands' and 40,000 acres of project lands.

The Ridenbaugh irrigation system was privately constructed about the year 1890 for the irrigation of the Ridenbaugh lands in the Boise valley by means of water diverted from the Boise river. The Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District was organized in 1905, and acquired the Ridenbaugh system and water rights, subject to the vested rights of the land owners. The Boise Project was constructed by the Federal Bureau of Reclamation in 1909, and encompasses approximately 165,000 acres of land in the Boise valley. The main canal of this project, the New York canal, diverts water from the Boise river about four miles above the Ridenbaugh diversion. The water for the project is principally flood water, and water stored in the Arrowrock, Anderson Ranch, and Deer Flat reservoirs. About 40,000 acres of the Boise Project lands are situate within the boundaries of the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District. Some of the Boise Project lands within the district are served with Boise Project water, through the Ridenbaugh canal system, which was enlarged by the reclamation bureau for that purpose. The remainder of the project lands within the district are served with project water through the project distribution system. Other lands of the Boise Project are located within the boundaries of four other irrigation districts.

Prior to 1926 the Boise Project system was controlled and operated, and the charges for operation and maintenance were determined and imposed, by the Federal Bureau of Reclamation. In 1926, by means of contracts entered into by the United States and the five irrigation districts in which project lands are located, the operation and control of the project irrigation system, with exception of the dams, reservoirs and head works, were vested in the Boise Project Board of Control. The Board of Control is composed of representative directors from the boards of the five irrigation districts. The contract between the government and the Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District effecting the transfer of control is known as the 1926 contract.

Under the federal law the owner of land in a federal reclamation project is required to pay, in advance, annual charges or tolls levied and collected to cover the cost of operation and maintenance, on the basis of the amount of water delivered. U.S.C.A., Title 43, § 492. The time of payment and penalties for nonpayment are fixed by §§ 493 to 496, inclusive. Section 477 of Title 43 authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to appoint an irrigation district 'as the fiscal agent of the United States to collect the annual * * * charges for operation and maintenance and all penalties,' and further provides:

'Provided, That no water-right applicant or entryman shall be entitled to credit for any payment thus made until the same shall have been paid over to an officer designated by the Secretary of the Interior to receive the same.' Sections 498 and 499 authorize the transfer of the management of irrigation works, except reservoirs and works necessary for their protection, to the owners of the lands irrigated thereby, 'under such rules and regulations as may be acceptable to the Secretary of the Interior.'

Section 500 of Title 43 makes it the duty of the irrigation district to take over the care, operation and maintenance of the project works 'subject to such rules and regulations as the Secretary may prescribe.'

By Chapter 143, Idaho Session Laws 1915, irrigation districts within this state were authorized to contract with the United States under the federal statutes above referred to. I.C. Title 43, Ch. 18.

I.C. § 43-1812 authorizes an irrigation district to act as fiscal agent of the United States, to make collection of moneys for and on behalf of the United States in connection with a federal project.

I.C. § 43-1820 requires an irrigation district to administer works constructed under the provisions of a contract with the United States in accordance with the provisions of the Act of Congress.

I.C. §§ 43-1821 through 43-1828 provide for the making and collection of annual assessments for operation and maintenance and procedure and penalties applicable thereto.

I.C. § 43-1824 specifically provides that the assessment for operation and maintenance 'shall be apportioned pursuant to the provisions of section 5 of the Act of Congress of August 13, 1914.' U.S.C.A., Title 43, § 492, supra.

Under the 1926 contract,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Thompson v. Hagan
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • June 26, 1974
    ...the latter enactment prevails over the earlier. Herrick v. Gallet, 35 Idaho 13, 204 P. 477 (1922); Little v. Nampa-Meridian Irrig. Dist., 82 Idaho 167, 350 P.2d 740 (1960); Jordan v. Pearce, 91 Idaho 687, 429 P.2d 419 DONALDSON and BAKES, JJ., concur. SHEPARD, Chief Justice (dissenting). I ......
  • Employment Sec. Agency v. Joint Class "A" School Dist. No. 151
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • March 22, 1965
    ...will should control.' Lloyd Corporation v. Bannock County, 53 Idaho 478, 25 P.2d 217 (1933). See also Little v. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, 82 Idaho 167, 350 P.2d 740 (1960); Herrick v. Gallet, 35 Idaho 13, 204 P. 477 (1922); Peavy v. McCombs, 26 Idaho 143, 140 P. 965 (1914). To the......
  • Knudson v. Bank of Idaho
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • December 18, 1967
    ...irreconcilable conflict the later enactment controls. State v. Teninty, 70 Idaho 1, 212 P.2d 412 (1949); Little v. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, 82 Idaho 167, 350 P.2d 740 (1960). The Prudent Man Investment Act was amended in 1963 to make it specifically applicable to banks acting as ......
  • Lodge v. Miller
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • June 22, 1967
    ...of ch. 18, and that the latter section, having been enacted subsequent to ch. 11, is controlling (citing Little v. Nampa-Meridian Irrigation District, 82 Idaho 167, 350 P.2d 740 (1960)); and that the board of directors of defendant district, having contracted with the United States pursuant......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT