2009-10-29_REVISION - M1987049 (4)

Home Browse Search

' gathered water to the extent of the needs of the land s it irriMates. There has been no interference with such pos- session and use by any other appropriator or consumer of water of this river. To apply now a doctrine depriving the users of this water of the right so exclusively o s- p sessed to the present, and in reliance upon which said swamn lands have been reclaimed and said lands to whi h c this riater is applied have been made into homes and highly improved, and in view of such notoriety of use and rack of injury to appropriators from the river, would be inequitable and un- just, and all appropriators from the river are esto peed by limitations and laches to now assert superior right-to said seaters so employed by claimant. Claimant is entitled to have its rights here protected by decree declaring said rights to the extent of which they have been used. In this proceeding where all persons interested a re either parties and have been or may be heard or b t t , y s a ute may contest such ad d ju ication within two or four yeare fully, it is proper that this right be declared in the present pro- ceeding which has jurisdiction over the area and properties affected and where all have ample opportunity to be heard: Although to the extent of four cubic fe t e per second, this water is not a diminution of the supply of the South Platte river, yet practical considerations make it necessary for the preservation of public peace and making certain of undefined property rights, that the right to this water should be adjudicated. This proceeding is a fit one for such adjudi- cation, and it is not the policy of the law to require any any special proceeding for adjudicating said right which would be prohibitory in cost, Qi % kw f