The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-12-12
SITUATION ABOUT
LAKE WATER RIGHTS
City COunciFWiII Have Facts Be
fore Ii at Monday Nights
Meeting.
TRANSACTION EXPLAINED
in DETAIL BY MR.. THOMAS
Brief Review of Case and What
Is Necessary to Be
Done.

When the city council meets Mon.
day night it VIII no doubt bc presented
with facts and figures concerning the
three lakes in the Big Cottonwood,
claimed by tho city as water rights,
and which the government seeks to
have restored TO the public domain. Al
the council meeting Thursday evening
n communication was received from r..
=. Richards, special city attorney, hand
ling tho water rights of the city, TO the
effect that he had received information
that the government desired the res
toration Of the lakcs-Blanche, Flor
cnce and Lily-if the city does not in
tend to use them, and also that the
government has begun proceedings
looking toward the cancellation Of
whatever rights tho city lays claim TO,
The question involved, according to
Mr.. Thomas. is whether or not the city
shall relinqnish its rights TO Lake
Blanche, Lake Florence and Lake LILY,
situated in Big Cottonwood canyon,
about six miles this side of Brighton.
According TO Mr.. Thomas 1t is neccS-
sary to make two filings for reservoir
sites aud tributary water rights. one
with the government for the land and
another with tho state for tho water.
Lakes Blanche. Florence and Lily were
filed upon August Il, 1895, by w. l..
Dykes, Hank Barnes and +. j. Auson,
at which time he district had not been
surveyed by the government. Subse-
qucntly the rights were purchased by
Harry Cole and i. NJ. Thomas. The
ground was surveyed about 1904, from
which time the fVc-ycar clause In re-
gard TO Improvement work was in force.
Thomas and Cole started a dam at
Lake Blanche.
Transfer of Lakes.
Two years ago the three lakes men.
toned were sold 10 the city for ap.
proXimatcly $4,000. Lakes Mary, Mar.
tina and Phoebe, in Little Cottonwood
wore also sold. i. :. Richards aud Oe.
den Hilcs, special counsel for the city,
are said TO have disapprovCd the pur-
chase OF the Big Cottonwood lakes al.
lcging that the Thomas-Colc filing
rights were invalid. Nothing was done
in the way of improvement, Mr.. Rich.
ards, IL is said, having taken the atti-
tude that the city did not want them
After the sale 20 the city, the Brown
Sanford Irrigation company made a
filing on the three Big Cottonwood
lakes.
Recently a government inspector Wis
tied the lakes 10 determine what i'm
provomeut work had been done. As
the law governing such land grants had
not been lived up to and the inspector
having been given 10 understand that
tho city did not want the lakes, the
inspector prepared to reporter has nj
ready Teported-to The government the
situation, including in his report rec
| ommendation that tho filings be can.
celed, in which event the property
would revert 10 the government. 1t Is
! highly probable that IN that event tho
Sanford Brown Irrigation company
would promptly make q new filing and
claim the site.
May Extend Time.
| Mr.. Thomas takes the view that the
special counscl-referring principally
| to Mr. Richards-wcrc derolict in theiI
duty, iuasmuch as they did not make
new filings after the city had pur
chased the property from Thomas and
Cole if. as he contends, the original
filings were invalid. In this way the
city would have been protected.
Mr.. Thomas is of tho opinion that ii
the city council eyinccs "A desire to hold
and improve the property Tho govern,
ment Will readily grant an extension
Of time.