State of Nebraska v. State of Wyoming et al. 325 US 589 (1945) 325 US 589

Home Browse Search

Second Acre Canal Priority Acres Feet Feet [] 1. WYO. Grattan 11/1/82 614 9 1,639 North Platte 9/22/83 3,153 45 8,418 Rock Ranch Spring/84 2,250 32 5,908 Pratt Ferris 5/22/86 1,200 17 3,204 _ _ _ 7,217 103 19,169 2. NEB. Tri -State 9/16/87 51,000 729 178,500 1 Mitchell 6 /20/90 13,633 195 35,000 _ 3. WYO. 64,633 924 213,500 Burbank 11/6/91292 5 833 Torrington 11/28/912,06129 5,503 Lucerne 2/21/93 4,22160 11,270 _ _ _ 6,574 94 17,606 See footnotes at end of table. 20 They are shown on Wyoming's Exhibit No. 149. 21 They are shown on Wyoming's Exhibit No. 150. [325 U.S. 589, 649] 4. NEB. Ramshom 3/20/93 994 14 3,000 Gering 3/15/97 13,500 193 36,000 _ _ _ 14,494 207 39,000 5. WYO. Burbank 3/12/98 20 1 53 Narrows 11/13/99 110 2 334 Lingle -Hill (via Interstate) 9/6/01 11,500 164 34,299 _ _ _ 11,630 167 34,686 6. NEB.: Tri -State 4/14/02 1,300 19 4,550 17. WYO. Wright 4/23/02 110 2 303 Grattan 1/27/04 70 1 187 Murphy 4/2/04 100 1 275 Grattan 12/2/04 639 9 1,706 _ _ _ 919 13 2,471 8. WYO. Lingle - Hill (via Interstate) 12/6/04 2,300 33 11,655 Pathfinder Irrigation District (via Interstate) Wyoming lands 12/6/04 2,300 33 9,844 Goshen Irrigation District via (Ft. Laramie) 12/6/04 50,000 714 137,500 _ _ _ 54,600 780 158,999 9. NEB. Pathfinder Irrigation District (via Interstate) Nebraska Lands 12/6/04 84,950 2 1,213 363,586 Gering -Ft. Laramie Irrigation District (via Ft. Laramie) 12/6/04 53,500 764 147,100 Northport 12/6/04 4,548 3 65 19,100 ___ 142,998 2,042 529,786 10. WYO. Rock Ranch 1/3/10 822 12 2,195 French 2/20/11504 7 1,346 _ _ _ 1,326 19 3,541 11. NEB.: French 12/21/11 770 112,056 12. WYO.: French 7/14/15 147 2 392 13. NEB. French 9/11/15 213 3 569 French 3/20/20 42 1 102 --- 255 4 671 [] [325 U.S. 589, 650] Nebraska contends that the requirements of Tri -State should be 196, 000 acre feet and that the allotment to the Gering -Ft. Laramie Irrigation District should be 169,165 acre feet. The argument for the increase for Tri -State is based on the theory that Nebraska has not been given in this section the same margin of safety which was allowed Wyoming in the Pathfinder - Whalen section of the river. But Nebraska has not shown that this allowance was less accurate than the ones made to Wyoming in the other section of the river. And our reading of the record convinces us that the allowances to Nebraska are as liberal as those to Wyoming and that an increase to either would not be justified in view of the overappropriation of the natural flow. The argument of an increase in the allotment to the Gering -Ft. Laramie Irrigation District points out that it receives the same headgate allotment as the Goshen Irrigation District in Wyoming which supplies the Wyoming land under this canal and that the lower area should be given a substantially larger headgate allotment to compensate for canal losses in the upper section of the canal. This argument, however, is not supported by evidence. The same allowance for the lands in each State is supported by the record. For there is evidence that the delivery to the lands in each State in relation to headgate diversions is substantially the same. The United States contends that the allowance of 65 second feet for the Northport Canal is error. As the Special Master indicated, the 65 second feet allowance is the amount necessary to serve the acreage under that canal which will not be served by return flow intercepted and transported for Northport by the Tri -State canal. But as the United States points out return flow is not steady during the irrigation season. It presented a study showing that in the seven best years from 1930 to 1940 the average return flow intercepted by Tri - State on May 1 was only 23 second feet, averaged only 43.9 second feet for the [325 U.S. 589, 65 1] month of May, averaged 135 second feet for the month of July and did not reach its peak of 200 second feet until September 30, the end of the irrigation season. On that basis Northport could irrigate very little of its acreage from return flow in the first part of the irrigation season, though at the end of the season it could irrigate all. The second feet requirement of Northport is 186. We conclude that Northport should be entitled to use that amount of flow during the season to meet its requirement of 19,100 acre feet. The 186 second feet will, however, be subject to reduction by the amount of return flow intercepted by the Tri- State Canal for delivery to Northport at any given point of time. As, we have noted,22 the Special Master recomments that for this part of the decree segregation of natural flow and storage water be determined in accordance with the formula and data appearing in U.S. Exhibit 204A, unless and until Nebraska, Wyoming and the United States agree upon a modification or upon another formula. Wyoming contends that it is impossible to determine what is natural flow and what is storage water in the Whalen -Tri -State Dam section of the river from day to day. The problem is a perplexing one. Physical segregation is, of course, impossible. But on the basis of the record we think that it is feasible to determine what portion of the flow at a given point is storage water and what portion is natural flow. Precision is concededly impossible. But approximations are possible; and they are sufficient for the administration of the river under the decree. It is true, as Wyoming says, that in order to segregate storage water and natural flow, losses by evaporation must be determined and, since those losses vary from