California Court of Appeal

The trial court erred in granting a writ of mandate invalidating defendant-board's adoption of a regulation that is likely to require a reduction in diversion of water from the Russian River stream system for frost protection of local vineyards and orchards, under certain circumstances, where: 1) in regulating the unreasonable use of water, the defendant-board can weigh the use of water for certain public purposes, notably the protection of wildlife habitat, against the commercial use of water by riparian users and early appropriators; 2) defendant-board may exercise its regulatory powers through the enactment of regulations, as well as through the pursuit of judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings; 3) defendant-board properly found the regulation to be necessary to enforce water use statutes and did not unlawfully delegate its authority by requiring local governing bodies to formulate the substantive regulations; and 4) there was no error in defendant-board's certification of the environmental impact report.

Appellate Information

• Decided 06/16/2014
• Published 06/16/2014

Judges

• MARGULIES

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel