Page 11 - Beaumont Basin Watermaster

Mr. Vela asked about limitations on area of use. Mr. Montoya
clarified that it is being transferred for water service. California
law requires proof of water rights for development, not paper
water rights. Mr. Jaggers added that the overlying right is
assigned to certain properties within the adjudication. Mr.
Montoya specified that the overlying rights are tied to the parcels.

Mr. Jaggers asked if more water is transferred to the appropriator
than is provided for the development on an annual basis, does
that appropriator then secure the leftover supply for their use.
Mr. Montoya noted the intent of the transfer is to give all overlying
rights but not all need to be used; the rights are correlative to the
basin as a whole. Only what is going to be serviced back to the
parcel would transfer to the appropriator.
Mr. Montoya identified the difference as a delta which is a
correlative right and could be arguably used by other parties. In
the case of a decrease in safe yield, the overlying right would
decrease, and so would the appropriative right, as the
appropriator is only taking the amount of water forgone by the
overlyer.
Thus is not true of an increase; overlying rights holders would not
have an increase in their rights. By transfer, the right is intended
to be fully divested from the property and becomes appropriative.
The appropriative rights holder would not have the benefit of the
increase in yield because the rights are correlative and are for the
benefit of everyone.

The Watermaster would have to look at the judgment and clarify
the issue: the overlying party would not enjoy benefit of increased
safe yield, as that is inconsistent with correlative rights law.

Chair Vela suggested investigating this further for the purposes
of accounting and tracking.

Mr. Montoya continued, in response to Mr. Jaggers: the overlying
water rights holder has forgone its overlying right and it has
become appropriative only to the extent that the appropriator is
providing that water back for use on a particular overlying parcel.
The overlyer might still have overlying rights for what is not being
used. Mr. Jaggers asked if that goes back into the pool to be
redistributed; Mr. Montoya replied it could; but if the overlyer
wants water service for only a fraction of the overlying rights, the
overlying right remains in the ownership of the overlyer, unused.
If unused, pursuant to the judgment, it would be redistributed.
Mr. Jorritsma asked if an appropriator takes over additional
properties would the percentages allotted in the judgment
change; Mr. Montoya said it would not.

4667987.1 -- N1356.1
Beaumont Basin Watermaster - August 1, 2018 - Page 11 of 31