The Grit-advocate., 1904-08-12

er right. with a correct understand
ing of the proposition we believe thai
a majority Of those concerned vii
favor the consolidation of the system,
by the purchase of the reservoir AN
Petersen ditch.
The Tidings and The Reservoir.
In an editorial opposing the reser
voir proposition, the Tidings admittel
last week that 'the country might be
able to survive the bnrden (of a 81. O
tax for interest on bonds and mainte
nance of resesvoir) If good crops were
a certainty every year, or the supply
of reservoir water could be utilized
| whenever it was needed
In the first place it is not likely that
the district would be bonded for an
amount which would make the inter,
est equal to u tax OF 81 90 per acre u2,
on the land therein. In the second
place no sane person believes that it
would cost 81. 500. 90 per year. or SlOy
per acre, to maintain the system after
it is completed. There would there
fore be no tax Oh 500 per acre upon
the land fo- interest and maintenance.
Again the statement of the Tidinps
that RESERVOIR water is only intended d
to be used to finish crOps-to be used
in August" is misleading. AS a
matter OF fact reservoir water can be
used whenever the people who own it
wish to use it. Farmers who are grow
ing wheat and alfalfa can use the w1t-
er in May or in June if they need it
then. They could use no more than
they were entitled to, but they could
use it VIII. never they wished to use it.
For the sake OF argument VIC will sup
pose that the reservoir and bitches
will cost the land owners in the dis
trlct $500 per acre per year for inter
est and maintenance charges. Even
then the tax would not be more than
they could bear. Three bushels Of
wheat or 500 pounds of sugar beets
would pay the bill, and if the reservoir
water will not increase the productive
ness of every acre Of land in the dis.
trict more than three bushels of wheat
or 800 pounds of sugar beets, above
what it is under present conditions,
then the people do not want it at any
price.
We be lieve that the productiveness
Of the land will be nearly doubled by
the use Of reservoir water, therefore
we believe that the reservoir should
be built, provided it can be constructed
for reasonable price. And we shall
continue to advocate its construction
regardless OF the threat made by the
Tidings that should it be put through
sit would be hard to restrain the in
dlgnatinn which would be aroused in
certain quarters"
Second Reservoir in Morgan County
A second reservoir is being con
structed in Morgan county by D. A
Camtield, the gentleman who is nego
tiating with the Julesburg Irrigation
district for the construction of res
ervOir in this county. Mr.. Camtield
built the Jackson Lake reservoir in
Morgan county, and is now building
the Riverside reservoir in the same
county. Steps have been taken there
by the farmers interested to form an
irrigation district and purchase COO
water rights from the reservoir.
There is some opposition to the pro-
ject but it is not likely that it will be
defeated, as may bdseen from the ar
ticle reprinted below, which was taken
from the Fort Morgan Times of last
week and credited to the Denver
Times:
THE preliminary developments are
pushing steadily along in the matter
of the formation of the Bijou Irriga-
tion district and the purchase of the
Bijou ditch and reservoir, and 1000
water rights from the Riverside res
ervOir.
'The same character of combatants
against the proposition as were con-
spicuous while the Morgan ditch farm
ers were trafficking for Jackson Lake
water are in the field agains, the Biiou
scheme, with the same apparent lack
of reason, as shown by the fact that
the Morgan ditch farmers are this
minute drawing on their reservoir
water supply and are particularly we'll
satisfied with their jackson lake pur.
chase.
1T Is thought, however, the progress
sive element among the Bijou farmers
are largely in the majority and that
the deal will go through, and that
next year water from the Riverside