The times-herald. [volume] (Burns, Harney County, Or.) 1896-1929, 1907-11-02
DECISION IN CAREY ACT CASE
LOCAL OFFICERS RECOMMEND SELEc.
TION BE CANCELLED.
Pacific live Stock Compauy's Protest Against
Harvey Valley improvement Company
Upheld BY The Land Ciiiee.

The register and receiver of
the local land office have render
ed decision in the case of the pro-
testof the Pacific Live Stock Co.
VS.. the State of Oregon and the
Haney Valley Improvement Co..
involving the Carey selection
embracing 5S, 3l4. 81 acres of land
in this valley.
Register Fare wrote his decis-
ion on August %. He goes into
an exhaustive review of the evil
dence taken at the time of the
hearing last November and his
decision covers about II pages of
type written natter He shows
a careful study of the testimony
and is very conservative in his
opinion and comment of the same.
After summing up this testimony
he closes with the following:
"Will the average land in Har-
ney Valley. or such lands as are
embraced in this selection. in an
ordinary year, with a precipita-
tion of q little over ten inches.
produce a renumerative crop
without artificial irrigation? We
believe not, and taking into con-
sideration all matters before us.
do not feel justified in holding
that these lands are non-desert,
and accordingly find that the
lands are desert within the mean
ing of the law, and we are not
entirely unsupported in our view.
for the Iridity of larney Valley
and surrounding country Is also
recognized and mentioned by
Professor lsreal c. Russell Osee
Preliminary Report on the Geo
logy and Water Resources of
Central Oregon. 1867
In regard to the availability
of water supply. the Pacific Live
Stock Company has introduced
in evidence o decree. based on
stipulation. of the Circuit Court
of the United States for the Dis
trict of Oregon. in the case of
the Pacific Live Stock Company
VS.. W, d. Hanley and others,
and also q large number of GER
titled copies of water claims.
Under the laws of the State
of Oregon q water notice is not
sufficient evidence of an appro-
priation, but il is the application
of the water to q beneficial use
made within q reasonable time.
Il does not appear in the evid-
ence of an appropriation of any
water.
THE decree against Hanley
and the other does not decree 20
the Pacific Live Stock Company
any given quantity of water; il
simply shows that il is entitled,
certain parts of the year,
TO have the waters of Silvies
River and It's tributaries flow
down their various channels
through and over the lands of
the Pacific Live Stock Company.
and thence into Malhcur Lake,
and that the defendants in said
suit are entitled during a short
period of each summer 10 main
tain dams in the river, and tor
tain said flow 10 certain extent.
1T does not appear that the
Valley improvement
Company was in any way con-
nected with said suit, and con-
sequently said decree can not
bind it,
1T being a matter of common
knowledge that by far the larg-
est bulk of the waters of Silvies .
River and its tributaries flow into .
Malhew Lake and there eyapor-
ate. il can therefore not be con-
tended that the Pacific Live
Stock Company and the other
water claimants absorb
MI the water there is; and we
,an not therefore, find that
here would be no water for the
Harney Valley Improvement
company.
As to the feasibility of the
plan Of reclamation by the Har-
hey Valley Improvement Com
lany, the testimony seems to us
insufficient to base any findings
hereon, it being entirely hear
.ay and opinion testimony, not
,ased upon any scientific or prac-
ical investigation.
1T however, appears from the
proclamation by the
Of the State, published
n the Oregonian, and the tele-
,ram from the Secretary of State
Exhibits f and G., that the