, 1891-11-19
AN TNTEB STATE QUESTION.

AN INTER STATE QUESTION.
The novel Interstate question which has
arisen in regard to the appropriation of
the waters of the Big Laramie river has
naturally aroused a good deal of feeling
in Larimer county. Colo, and Fort Col
Inns, its county seat. The Fort Collins
Courier takes the Denver Melos to task
rather acrimoniously because the latter
PAPER in a spirit OF fairness that could not
be too highly commended suggested that
the rights OF both Wyoming and Colorado
parties should come In for consideration.
The Courier goes on to say: This
record State Engineer Mead's) shows that
the Laramie river discharges a great deal
more water thau the Poudre, and we do
not believe that the Ne,os will claim that
there is one-tenth the amount Of CROPS
raised in the Poudre valley. This shows
that there Is an immense amount of un-
appropriated water left in that river.
The ditch in question is to be built at an
elevation of 5000 feet above sea
level. and is designed to tap a few
small tributaries OF the Laramie
river, and the amout taken must
be SO small that the citizens living on the
river would scarcely be able to notice it.
All the bitches in Wyoming on the Lara
mie river were built after the adoption of
Colorsdo's constitution and after it had
been ratified by the congress of the United
States, and it is a question whether the
people of Colorado would not have a
RICH. to appropriate all the waters of the
Laramie river rising in Colorado. instead
of the unappropriated portion thereof. II
the position taken by the Nei1s is right,
Kansas, Nebraska and New Mexico can
demand the headgates OF the bitches in
Colorado be shut down and that the water
be allo wed to run naturally, and the de-
mand would be much more consistent,
coming from those states, because they
still adhere to the riparian rights doc
trine."
As heretofore stated in THE LEADER,
this question is a novel one which has
never before been contemplated by the
lay or considered BY the couris,Wyo
ming claims the ownership of tho waters,
within its boundaries under the constitu-
ton adopted by the people and ratified by
congress. Colorado has just precisely As
strong a case so far as regards the waters
within its boundaries. But the appropri-
atoms from the Laramie river in Albany
and Laramie counties, this state, were
made long before the ditch from the
head waters of the stream in Colorado
was contemplated. On the strength of
these water rights valuable ranches have
grown up and valuable impr lvements
have been made. II at this late day Col
orado is allowed to come in and appropri-
ate all the water from the first six miles of
the stream, even though all this work is
done in Colorado, the result must neces-
sarily be to destroy the value of vested
rights in Wyoming and financially cripple
the settlers along the same stream in
Wyoming who had every assurance of
ownership under the law and who with
great labor and expenditure of money
uuNe sSNureu mUTt U Ut leSS NdiuaOle proper
ties. II does not seem possible to us that
when the question comes before the
UuI,ed States court that the equities of
Wyoming people should not be considered.
II the object of the Colorado people is
simply to secure the unappropriated water
from the Big Laramie We do not sec why
they are not entitled to it after it has been
demonstrated by the proper authorities.
But if the purpose is TO take all the water
for the first six miles of the stream ION
which depends the permanent supply in
the stream after it enters Wyoming) and
thus render extremely uncertain if not
actually destroy its value to previous
appropriations in Wyoming, then it
becomes a question for Intervention on the
part OF the United States court.
There is nothing to be gained by handy
ing words in this matter. There are two
sides to the question and many interests
involved both here aud 10 Colorado. The
equities in the case are a matter for the
courts and as no work is now in progress
on the Colorado ditch the matter should
be submitted to the proper courts for an
authoritative decision.