My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP02931
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
WSP02931
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:47:44 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 11:27:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8135.100
Description
Ditch Companies - Amity Mutual Irrigation Company
State
CO
Basin
Arkansas
Water Division
2
Date
1/1/1975
Author
Amity Mutual
Title
Annual Report - 1974
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Annual Report
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Annu~I Report For 1974 <br /> <br />Attol'Dey's Repol't <br />To <br />The Amity Mutual Irrigation Company <br /> <br />TO THE SHAREHOLDERS AND DIRECTORS <br />AMITY MUTUAL IRRIGATION COMPANY <br />HOLLY, COLORADO 81047 <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Ladies and Gentlemen: <br /> <br />The undersigned was considerably surprised, but agreeably- pleased, to <br />learn through your superintendent, Mr. William Ho"'land, on October 17th, <br />that your Board of Directors was considering appointing me as your <br />attorney to fill the vacancy caused by the unfortunate death of Mr. Robert <br />G. Rogers on September 9th. <br /> <br />Accordingly, I met with your Board of Directors Cor the first time on <br />November 6, 1974 and have been attempting to familiarize myself with your <br />business. <br /> <br />The Supreme Court of Colorado has handed down several decisions <br />regarding water law which I feel will be oC great importance in the years to <br />come. <br /> <br />The (ir"s! of these is that o( SheHon F.ums, in whirh an appeal was <br />taken from the decision of Judge Gobin allowing a decree to Shelton Farms <br />for a priority outside the control of the State Engineer (or water formerly <br />consumed by phreatophytes which Sheltons had removed. Judge Gobin had <br />ruled that Shelton could use approximately 442 A.F. of water on its farms. <br />The Supr"eme Court held otherwise and set aside Judge Gobin's decree. The <br />Supreme Court somewhat apologized for its ruling, stated that it ruled <br />that way with a great deal of reluctance but felt that i( such a practice was <br />to be allowed it should come from the legislature rather than from the <br />Water Court. <br /> <br />In another case the Supreme Court ruled that water which would take <br />from 175 to 300 years to reach the river was not tributary to the river <br />and so therefore. the use or it could not be stopped by the state Engineer. <br /> <br />The undersigned has been active for many years in various organiza- <br />tions regarding the uses of water and the control of it by the State Engineer <br />and I have repeatedly stated in many public meetings and again wish to <br />emphasize that the big cities of Colorado- -through their control of the <br />legislature and through their ability to aggravate one group of farmers <br />against another and thereby divide them- -are rapidly changing the uses of <br />the waters of Colorado from agricultural to municipal and recreational <br />purposes. The watchword for farmers should be- -to paraphrase an <br />illustrious patriot: <br /> <br />Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.