RECENT DEVELOPMENT IN UTAH LAW: B. The Utah Water Conservancy Act Does Not Confer Statutory Standing upon a Water Conservancy District to Press Forfeiture Claims or to Appeal an Administrative Decision of the State Engineer

1. Introduction In Washington County Water Conservancy District v. Morgan, 1 the Utah Supreme Court held that the Water Conservancy Act, 2 which sets forth the purpose and powers of water conservancy districts, does not give water conservancy districts statutory standing to press forfeiture claims, nor to appeal administrative decisions of the state engineer. 3 Additionally, the court held that water conservancy districts must meet traditional standing requirements to appeal a state engineer's decision. 4 Mere participation in the administrative process is not sufficient to grant standing, and the issue of water rights forfeiture in this case was not sufficiently important to grant the Washington County Conservancy District an exception to traditional standing requirements. 5 2. The Case The Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints ("CPB") purported to own certain water rights in Washington County, Utah. 6 The CPB filed a change application to alter "the nature, place of use, and points of diversion for these water rights." 7 The Washington County Water Conservancy District ("Conservancy District") protested the application. The Conservancy District - disputing not the changes but the water rights themselves - asserted that "all or part of the CPB's water rights had been forfeited for nonuse according to the provisions of section 73-1-4 of the Utah Code." 8 The state engineer issued a memorandum decision that approved the CPB's change application, but failed to address the issue of forfeiture. In his decision, ...