In this case we see a dispute over water rights, and the right to transfer. 

Ken-Wal is a landowner and a member of the Fort Vannoy Irrigation District. Ken-wal holds five water rights certificated to obtain water to raise his crops, which includes certificates 8942 and 8943. Theses certificates were issued to the district in 1930. Under those 2 specific certificates the district supplies water through the districts irrigation system to a portion of kens land. 

In 1999 Ken-wall applied to the Water Resource Department  to change the points of diversion associated with the water rights in his five certificates, by making the points of diversion two two locations, and  to build a new irrigation system to deliver the water provided under all five certificates. Although the District believed that they were the holders of the water use subject to transfer, and would not give consent. 

The issue in this case is is whether Ken-Wal or the district is the "holder of a water use subject to transfer. The Water Rights Commission stated that because Ken-wall holds the ownership interest in the water rights established in certificates 8942 and 8943, he is the holder. 

Although the Court of Appeals reverses the WRCs order, stating that the District is the holder. This is because the certificates were issued to the District and because there is a trust relationship between the district and Ken-Wal. Then although Ken-Wal holds the beneficial use of the water rights, beneficial use is not enough to acquire certificated water rights. The district was responsible for creating the irrigation system that brought water to Ken-wals land, and was a part of bringing the "certificated water rights into existence".