The enterprise. [volume] (Harlem, Mont.) 1899-1926, 1910-12-08
PROFESSOR SHAW CONSIDERS
MILK RIVER PROJECT
BY INVESTIGATION. BELIEVES GOVERNMENT IS RIGHT
IN DEMANDING ADJUDICATION OF WATER RIGHTS.

+ or several mOIlIHS pdSt HaNV
been giving some attention to the
work now in progress to furnish wat
er to the owners of irrigable lands
in the Milk River Valley. My inves-
LEGATIONS have led me to the follow
ing conclusions: W--That the Sec
retary of the Interior took the stand
five years ago that no irrigating wat
ers would be thrown into the Milk
| River until all the claims of those
who haveused water in the past have
been adjudicated by the courts, and
from that position the government
| has never receded. That is where
the government stands today. (2)-
That, Notwithstanding the attitude
Of the government repeatedly en-
pressed during those five years, some
of the water-users cling to the for
]orn hope that they are going to get
other. and what they consider bet
ter telms from the government. (D
That the cherlshing of this hope
those who have water rights, and
that such lnaction, and the delay
hat it has led to will cost the farm
ers Of the Milk River, who own irri-
gable lands, one Thousand times more
than would cover all the expense of
adjndicating the claims. (N-That
this delay, without Justification or
excuse asst seems to me, is now
jrora rad1zing the entire work. I'm
less part of that tWenty-million-
dollar fund is set aside to enable the
work to he completed. the hazard is
imminent that the work will be in
definitely delayed, and that would
simply be nothing short of a calam-
ity to the Milk River Valley.
have tried to look at this queS-
tion t, ~ lie standpoint OF an out
slider whose aim is to get the facts as
. they are, and must say that have
come to the conclusion that the gov
! ern,nent is right in it's contention
, that these claims must beadjudcated
before water is put into the river.
1t must be clear to everyone that
those claims must be adiudicated in
some way sometime. Why. then,
should they not be adjudicated nowo
This would be the ecommonsense move
! to make, even though there was no
risk Of losing a part of the twenty
: million appropriation.
! am not pleading the cause of the
government, nor of the reclamation
service. am not saying that they
have done all THAT they might have
done. | am not saying that the
water-users have no grievances, but
I am saying that complaining about
wrongs, fancied or real, will not throw
irrigating waters into the Milk River.
Many seem to think that adjudica-
tion is going to entail great cost.
Relatively, why should that be true?
l have been told by one of the best
informed owners of iirigable land in
the Milk River Valley that the en-
tire cost of ad djudicaton in the valley
will not be more than 21a cents an
acre. Suppose that estimate is low,
and to be safe, double it. 10 the
owner OF a quarter section of land
that would mean cost of $500 all
told. Suppose that land was all laid
down to alfalfa, with IA yield Of three
tons per acre, which is a very low es-
innate, the value of that alfalfa, at
present prices, would be $50 per acre,
and for the 1850 acres it would he
50 800. At half the price for the al
falfa, that is, ut $40 ton, the crop
would be worth $4,000. This is !,
large sum to be deprived of, because
a cost Of $500 sh6uld be called for to
make it's realization possible.
Farmers of the Milk River Valley,
why should one day be lost before
setting to work the machinery for
tie ad judication of those claims? Is
it not the duty of the men who have
water rights to consider the claims
of those lower down who ut the pre-
sent time have no such rights, but
who will have them us soon as those
claims are settled? Suppose the con-
ditions were reversed, and the pre-
sent owners of rights had located
lower down, would they not then con-
clude that the owners Of such rights
above them We're under some obliga-
tions to them? Then let the golden
rule begin to work now. Give it Il
chance, and it will very soon adjudi-
cate those claim