WSP01831 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

"GOVERNMENT PLANS '>,,\SURVEY OF OOLORADO ,;~. - RIVER IN OCTOBER "- " ,..,~.,\ "'-. ......, Pasadena. Calif., Aug. 18.-Eugene C. LaRue, district head of the United States geological sUr\"ey, has arrived here with plans for prepnril1; for a 8.urvey of the Colorado riv.:!l", from Boul~er canon to the Mexican border. The survey. he aald, would begin in I October, and its specific object would I be to gather data. on possible irriga- tion ot la"ds in Arizona, so that state ,would Imow just what benefit it would receive trom Improvement In th rivet. e .- ---._...~.- -..- gOod will theY !aY the supply of trout. is Burri- cave baths and O[ tlOl .".... cient to satL!y adl appetites. SUll Me. phur's tolks. " EijUlTABLE mVISION. OF WATER r. c: " IN THE LARAMIE RIVER IS ASKED " ti' fl. 0< t" Colorado Files Petition in Supreme Court to Reopen u, ~ or .~. . Case and Apportion Stream for-Irrigation th, Purposes Between States. (Continued from Pace One.) the 5oundnes.!l oC thUi contentlon t!l recognized by itation.!'! which retUge to rna.k~ It the treat}. basis ot 'rights to the use at international waltrs. "Surely one state of QUI'" own union," the brief declares, "should be treated by other 9t.ates, under a. judicial rule to be fonnulated, a.9 tavQrabl;>" a..s on~ nation would' be treated by another." Unless the priority principle laid. down by' the court Is changed, the "governme-nl reclamation project," the brlet asserts, "in anyone state be- comes a deadly menace to the later dPo- velopment ot every other slate upon an interstate stream, and the other states must stand like a wall a.g:1lnst COTlsent by CQngre!'lS to the construc. tion ot any such project." "Equitable division" is declared to be "entirely feasible," and "In choos- ing a rule to govern dlflltributlon be- tween states," it adds, .'It would 3eem that one should be chosen which will permIt the development of every state and not allow one state to he enriched at the expense of another." The decree of the court, the brief d.'~'dares, falls to specifically reeDG'- niLe the diverflIon of water from the headquarters of Deadman cret!-k by Colorado and should he modirIed. It is contended, to prevent tuture uncer. tainty which might lead to the erro- neous conclusion that right of the state and its citizen:'! to the continued use of water was not protected by the court. . c'" tho CITE DEClSIOS IN COLORADO COURT, Priorit). of appropriation or ~-ater for the Laramie-Poudre tunnel proj. ect, the brief a~e.t.9, was judicially delermlnt:d by the Colorado state courts to date tram August, 1902, in- st, stead. of 1909 as stated by the supreme. w court, which is declared to be "the p1 very crux of the case." It being ex- in plaJned that "in view' of the 1unda- mental principles announced by the opinion. it "becomes ot' transcenihmt Importance a.nd Is the guide. point controlling the. final disposItion ot' the case." A detailed hIstory of the project I!I presented in the brief to sustain the contention of tbe state as to thl'! date of Its' inception, and the court 1s asked to modlfJ--' its decision so that "the waten'!l of the river be apportioned to confonn to the superiority of the tunnel enter;n1se over the newer and junior enterprises In WyomiJ1&':' The court also is asked In the peti. tIon to assess one.haIr of the costs of the case ag-ainst wyoming, instead of requiring Colorado to pay all. The pelttion will not be cons.idered ~ by the court unUI it meeUl 1n October, th at <':I: tic m; AI R' 1Ie' .". 0" m' cl, iCf t" .,