The Caldwell tribune., 1905-12-09
JUDGE STEWART
RENDERS DECISION
The Water Rights in the Boise River
Finally Adjudicated n~

down his decision and decree in the
famous Boise river water case, in
volving all the water claimants along
that stream. The title of the case is
the Farmers Cooperative Ditch
company vs.. The Riverside Irrigation
district and others, and the decision
reads:
We thus arrive at the following
conclusions of law for the govern
ment of this case:
First. That the date of the ap-
propriation of water without notice,
relates and begins from the compile
tion of the works and the application
of the water to beneficial use.
Second. That the appropriation
of water under the statute, where the
statute has been strictly complied
with, relates to the date of the post
ing of che notice.
Third. That the extent of the ap
preparation of water is fixed by the
capacity Of the works and the ap-
plication to a beneficial use.
Fourth. That the maximum
capacity Of ditch determine the ex-
tent of the appropriation, where ap.
piled to a beneficial use, and the
capacity sof constructed canal is
determined by its carrying capacity
at its smallest point.
Fifth. That where there have
been enlargements of canal, that
the completion of the enlargements
determines the date of the appropria-
tion thereby, and the extent of the
appropriation.
Sixth. That title by preserip-
tion has not been shown to exist in
any Of the defendants or cross-com-
plainants in this case.
Seventh. That under the rule an
nounced by the supreme court of
this state in Oonant vs.. Jones, 3
Idaho, 6O6, "a person may add from
year to year, acreage to his cultivat-
ed lands, and increase his applica-
tion of water thereto for irrigation
as his abilities permit, until he has
put to q beneficial use the entire
amount of water at first diverted by
him and conducted to the point of
intended use."
Eight. That the increase in acre
age from year to year, does not ex-
tend the appropriation and make it
relate back, unless the works were
sufficient and water had been there
by diverted and conducted to the
point of intended use, sufficient to
cover and irrigate such increased
acreage. In other words, that the
extension and enlargement of the
ditch dxes the date of the appropria-
tion, while the extension of the acre
age under the ditch relates back to
the completion of the works, provid-
ing such works have been of sufficient
size to cover such increased acreage.
Ninth. That the duty of water is
to be determined by actual necessity
and economical use.
In determining the several allot,
ments hereafter made, where l have
not indicated to the contrary, the
appropriation was by the construc-
tion of works, diversion Of water
therein and the actual application to
a beneficial use. Where the ap-
preparation was under the statute, {
have indicated the same, and called
attention to whether or not the
statute has been complied with.
have numbered the rights fixed
by this opinion, in order of priority,
as matter Of convenience and easy
Identification, and the number will
indicate the rank of the right, except
where more than one right is fixed
upon the same date. In such case
they will all take equal rank as tc
priority.
Each party to this suit will be re.
quired to pay his own costs; and the
costs and fees of the state engineer,
amounting to the sum of $40, 804. so
which is allowed by the court, will
be apportioned to the several claim.
ants in the same proportion as the
water is allotted.
(The various rights allotted tc
water users by the decree of Judge
Stewart, in their order of precedence,
with the date of the right an the
amount Of water allotted, are as fol,
lows:)
Thomas Davis, June l, 1864,
10 inches. s
2 Jacobs Canal Co., Ltd, june
!, 1864, 1000 inches.
8 Middleton Mill Ditch Co., s
corporation, June, 1854. 64C
inches.
Thomas Andrews, June l, 1854,
165 inches. $685..
T. @. Catlin and Polete Mace,
June l, 1864, l43 inches.
6 T. @. Catlin and Polete Mace,
June /, 1864, 165 inches.
( n n Hovipd Tuna I 1894