Rocky Ford enterprise., 1904-02-12

for a conference before State Engineer
Carpenter, upon complaint made to
him by the Fort Lyons Canal Co.. asking
that he make certain rulings and put
certain limitations upon the water loan
ing as granted by an act OF the legisla-
iure in iSoo.
II. l.. Lubers. attorney for the Fort
Lyons Canal Co.. and a member OF the
legislature of 1901. who labored so hard
for the repeal Of the act. presented the
complaint. citing certain incidents IN
the practice OF the act. wherein alleged
hardships had been imposed upon other
appropriations than the ones parties to
the transaction
He made the charge that the Fort
Lyons company was refused loan by
the water commissioner OF this district.
because the application was not signed
by the president and the secretary OF the
company, and made complaint that in
the final granting Of the loan. they were
restricted To the amount OF water that
was being benchcially used by those
making the loan. These restrictions
placed upon this company. he said. were
In striking contrast with conditions IN
distric, fourteen; and to Illustrate. cited
an instance where exchange had been
made without even the knowledge oi the
officials. and received their sanction: and
made the assertion that in many in
stances the amount OF water loaned WAS
nu, restricted to the amount OF water
being bencdciaily used by the ditch
making the loan.
Division Engineer T.. 4. Chew made
answer - Mr.. Lubers complaint. lie
stated positively that he and his subor
dinatcs had adhered to, one plan of OPP
Grafton under tho lolninH act. He said.
that the, had never loaned more wafer
than was being actually carried by the
ditch making the loan: that the time
Iimi, o, ten days had been rigidly OBJ
served: that the case OF the Fort Lyons
Canal Co. referred to in Mr.. Lubcrs COM
plain, was dealt with rs other cases
were handled in other parts OF tho d.
vision.
While the main ohjec, Of this meeting
was To discuss every feature oi the water
lnlning practice in order to enable the
State Engineer to formulate rules 10
govern the practice. the discussion con-
s,anily dfiIted toward debate rs to the
merits ul tie law. Whether IL was be-
cause Of tho heated arguments engaged
IL by these same representatives both
times II was before the state legislature.
on ,hi. act. that caused them To DRIFT
over the same territory. or whether II
was some dnub, rs TO the justice oi tho
law. discussion was largely to prove or
dispTuye ,hs; the loanin. act was wise
legislation:
". W. Wiley Of Holly got himself in 4
trap. lie. In answer io Senator Swink's
s,a;emrn, that The Ami,y canal had fc-
eeiyed IaVors from the upper district,
stated ,ha, while the Amity had called
for loan. and. he had no doubt hut that
the water was turned uui for them. Il had
never reached their hcad-gaic.
II. NJ. McHarg rnSc aud remarked
tia, he though, Mr.. Wiley aud his asso.
cil,cS were taking valuable time and
going To- great expense to prevent
water loaning when. by Mr.. Wiley's own
statement. the water. II permitted to flow
towards his hcadga;c. would never reach
there.
/. ". Beatty bore Mcssrs McHarg and
Wiley out in their assertions. He said
lie positively knew that there was 4 hole
between the head OF the Ami,y canal and
La Iunia. He said that when he freight
ed iip the valley, before any bitches were
built. he used TO have TO dig in the sand
TO get water for himself and his stock.
The settling Of anything regarding the
lnlning practice was not accomplished.
The bitches Of the lower valley attempted
To show the abuses that worked to their
dcirimcnt. while Mr.. Chew. and Mr.
Dubbs, representing the Arkansas Val
ley Ditch. the one that has done the
mos, lOlning. denied that the loaning rs
practiCed had in,ericrrcd with the river
How. In the rambling discussion which
was participated in by the leading ditch
companies and some OF the best irri.
cation attorneys some very good points
were brought out.
A. "a al,
scarcity Of water. which caused these
early appropriations to regard with STU
spicion any attempt to assist junior APP
perpetrators, was largely due TO the new
system of farming that had been intro
duccd in the past few years. He said
that at one time he was the only small
farmer between Pueblo and the state
line: and il had been his one desire to
see the valley grow into community OF
homes: to see a dense settlement of
happy and prosperous families. lie
said that his hope was being realized.
Alfalfa. wheat and oats farming had
given away TO the more intensive culti-
vation Of beets, cantaloupes and t"ina-
toes. And now, having encouraged this
great population to locate in the valley,
he felt under obligations to be generous
and ncighborly. Ii had been his practice
to compel the water users under the
Rocky Ford ditch to be economic in the
use OF water and he had often loaned the
water of the Rocky Ford canal, when the
farmers under the ditch protested that
they needed it for their own crops. He
said that there were 900 farmers under
the High Line ditch that had been en-
abled TO save their crops by an occa-
sional loan at critical time.
II. L. Lubers replied that 500 farmers
under the TT. Lyons Canal had suffered
as tho result of Senator Swink's gener-
osity. This statement gave an opening,
and J. w. McClain opened up an old
sore by asking Mr. Lubers il it was not a
fact that the TT. Lyons Canal Company
had stretched the old appropriation they
were so stou;ly defending from Horse
Creek to the terminus Of the canal, when
it was originally proved up by app!i-