With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". of Fluid Property Rights, 50 Ariz. L. Rev.' 445, 456 (2008). During this time, our Territorial Supreme Court decided Trambley v. Luterman, 1891-NMSC-016, 6 N.M. 15, 27 P. 312, which is cited by Protestants and dismissed by Applicant as inapposite. We are persuaded by Trambley, in which the Supreme Court held that a prior non-consumptive use of an acequia to operate a grist mill was entitled to protection against a later upstream use that would diminish the flow of the stream. Id. ¶ 1. Trambley thus recognizes the common law priority of a non-consumptive beneficial use (powering a grist mill) in conjunction with other uses of a stream. This idea holds true in more modern times of statutory water codes. See City of San Antonio v. Tex. Water Comm‘n, 407 S.W.2d 752, 762 (Tex. 1966) (<HOLDING>); Richlands Irrigation Co. v. Westview

A: holding substantial completion had occurred because water district took possession of all the lines filled them with water and began using them to serve the customers of the water district
B: recognizing that watershed isolation or acquisition serves to prevent and control water contamination
C: recognizing the right to use water to generate power
D: recognizing that water retained within a watershed is susceptible to multiple use because all water uses are not consumptive uses
D.