Arizona republican., 1910-03-02


 to be applied is a necessary integral part of the appropriation and q fac tor by which the amount of the water appropriated for use k measured, it follows that when the water K no longer applied to the land for which Il was diverted. the right of approprid ton of such water for such land ceses The right of appropriation further de bends upon a supply of water that is unappropriatcd. It follows. therefore, that the first in time of appropriation is the first in right to appropriate since water previously appropriated by another k no longer available for a subsequent appropriation. The extent of the appropriation iS limited by the beneficial use to which the water can bc applied. The actual amount of wa ter that may be appropriated for lr- riGatiOn, therefore. is the amount that the iand owner can and does actually use in the necessary and economical irrigation of his land for cultivation This much and no more may he have, and this much he may only have when there is sufficient water available to supply first those prior in date or appropriation. The fundamental priu- ciplc in the doctrine of appropriation of the normal flow of water in stream for irrigation is it's application hy the land owner to the land for beneficial use. The right to appr"- priatc is a right that belongs to the land owner. but the water appropriated is appropriated for the land. and when SO appropriated it's use belongs to the land and not to the appropriator. The method of diversion from the river and the means of carriage of the wa ter to the land is immaterial in the establishment ar maintenance of the right. it may he done by the indi- viduaI appropriatOr or by an associa- tion of individual appropriators. or by canal company. or by any person or corporation: and the means of car riage or the point of diversion from the river may he changed from time to time to suit altered conditions with out impairing the right of appropria- ton already made. provided prior rights of others are not interfered with. There being in this Territory no private property in water. but Wa ter being d public property subject to
  and carving the water. such person. association or corporation acts merely as the agent of the approprator and acquires no right of appropriation to the water itself, and no rights as against the appropriation made to the land. except a right to proper compen-' sation for such diversion and carriage.
 Applying these general principles to the case in hand, it follows that the dates of the rcclamatiOn Of the land and it's first cultivation by the means of water diverted to the land by the land owner. must determine the date of the appropriation in each instance, that each appropriator in turn and prior to the one succeeding him lS entitled to have diverted and applied on his land quantity of water suf- ficient for the economical cultiva- tion thereof and no more, until the supply of available shall have been exhausted. provided the use of such water on his land shall have ben reasonably continuous.
 The various dates of the application nf water to the land the amount of water necessary for the economical cultivation thereof. the duration of such cultivation and the supply of water on his land shall have been stitial facts affecting all questions arising in the cease.
 A great amount of testimony has been taken as to the dates of ap- plication of water to the various sub divisions of land lying under the
 
 been checked in such ways as were possible. The results showing the years in which each piece of land was brought into cultivation have been tabulated. and it is believed are as accurate as is practically possible in a history which covers so great period of time and SO great an acre age. In each instance where land owner has brought into cultivation in II given year a portion only of sec tion or subdivision of d section of land owned by him. but with the intention of speedily retaining the balance. and he or his successors in interest subsequently, and within req sonable time have brought the hal ance of such land into cultivation by irrigation. and such cultivation has been kept up l have under the doc trirc of relation fixed as the date of the appropriation for the whole tract the date of the first cultiva- ton of the part
 Testimony has also in each in stance been given as to the dura- tion of cultivation. While in the main correct and accurate, it is my belief that in number of instances the facts as to the duration and eX- tent of the cultivation of the land have been exaggerated. So far as possible the testimony given has been
 
 
 ~ - -