Rocky Ford enterprise., 1897-01-07
THE RESERVOIR
AND STATE CANAL

Detailed Report Of the Irrigation Asso-
citation Meeting at Rocky Ford,
Tuesday, December go.
Senator Swink presided over the meet
ing held at Rocky Ford Tuesday, Dec.
%, md stated the object OF the meeting
to be 10 harmonize the views Of Pueblo
md the lower Arkansas valley on the
Twin Lakes reservoir and state canal
No. 1.
After an awkward pause g. T. Nash
moved the adoption Of the resolutions Of
the committee which recommend an ap-
preparation of 100000 for the state canal
and $4,000 for the reservoir.
A. N. Parish thought that this meeting,
including MS it did, all who were present,
was not competent to instruct the Irriga-
ton Association.
Mr.. Nash asked only for the endorse
ment Of the meeting.
II. #. Hagen wanted more llght on
what would be the effect Of carrying out
the resolutions.
Judge Voorhees,, one OF the committee,
said TINT everybody favored the Twin
Lakes reservoir, but how to use the wa
ter was The question. He analyzed the
Language of the resolutions. Priority
meant date of appropriation and amount.
"Pro rata would cut out the date and
distribute the water according to capa-
city only. The word fuse" would mean
for the benefit of the valley as a whole.
The demand" would depend on local ne.
\ cessity. The word necessity would
cover all the words previously used IN
the resolution. The language OF the res
canal equal rights to water. The state
owns 10000 acres aud private individuals
10000 under the line OF the state canal.
The object Of this meeting is to compro-
mise.
MI. Parish objected to the ambiguous
words OF the resolutions. While the res.
olutions did not suit him he would favor
a small appropriation for the canal to
keep 1t nlive until II could be unloaded
on some corporation.
Robert Grant objected to Mr.. Parish
opposing the resolutions which were
framed by a committee Of which he was
a member and made no minority report.
This point caused considerable contro-
l
Parish had right to express his opinion.
Mr.. Parish said that the state canal
had no merit. 1t was no use as an un,
derground reservoir as claimed. To build
this canal by taxation Of the people would
be to allow the state to go into competi-
tion with the hard working early settlers,
whose labor had already greatly nd
ynnccd tho value Of stnte lands in the
wiley. He feared that the reservoirs
could not be had unless the valley repre-
sentatives in the Legislature were united.
Hon. W. N. Randall wanted to know
how long the Pueblo people wanted the
canal kept alive and how far back they
dated the priority?
Scnutor Gordon wanted to know why
tho people Of Rocky Ford objected to
state canal No l?
Hon. ]. II. Crowley wanted to know
how far back Senator Gordon would date
the priority Of the state canal?
Mr.. Gordon said that il could not 60
back Of the existing canals.
Mr.. Crowley said IL q claim was made
for priority back to 1889 we wanted to
MI. Gordon said he would object to
tho canal il 1t dated back that far.
Mr.. Crowley said the reservoir would
be for the benefit Of every ditch in the
| valley Hllu WOulu sIeatis oI "a.
state lands md Pueblo people ought to
favor il without coaxing OF any kind. He
had no compromise to make. Under the
Bob Greek Canal was 1900 acres OF
state land which would be greatly ben
Gifted by the reservoir. II state canal No
, was for the benefit OF the people OF the
, state he would vote for it. MIR. Grant
was asked what priority he claimed for
the canal?
Mr.. Grant said that that could only be
determined by process OF law. But we
can't hurt your bitches which have ap-
piled water.
Mr.. Crowley said that the courts do
creed much more water to the various
, ditches than the river afforded, and that
, there were large bodies OF state land un-
der the Bob Creek canal for which there
: was no wuter. There nre $1,000 acres oi
state land under bitches already con.
structed. The difficulties in the way
and tho great expense are such thnt the
state can not possibly afford to build It
Would favor giving the work already
done to Mr.. Teller who has more land
under it than the state hos.
JIG. Greene wanted harmony on gen
eral principles and objected to this dis
cussion Of details.
Mr.. Crowley said that with his present
| USnp ne COulu uOI COIlpEOIuLec VIII WIG.
he knew to be wrong. He had kind
feeling for Pueblo, but they were asking
too much.
Mr.. Greene asked Mr.. Crowley il he
would oppose small appropriation fol
/, the state canal?
Mr.. Crowley said TINT the atate's in
come was going to be short next year and
wanted to know where the money was tc
, come from?
n Judge Voorhees, said that it was not @
discussion Of details that was wanted
but an appropriation. The priority oi
the etate canal would be n matter Of law
and depend on diligence in construction
and use of water. The state canal could
have no greater rights than an individ'
ual. Can We get together on an appro'
priation2 Are you willing to give uf
$4,000 to keep the state canal alive?
Mr.. Parish asked il Judge Voorhees,
claimed priority back to 1889?
Judge Voorhees, said he claimed moth
ing. :,
Mr.. Parish asked il Judge V. would
date the priority ut the date OF applicat
ion of water?
| Judge Voorhees, answered, Yes.
Mr.. Parish wanted to know the object
of keeping tho canal nliveP
Judge Voorhees, said, For the purpose
OF getting private parties interested with
the state in the scheme. He thought