The Delta independent., 1911-11-03
KANSAS-COLORADO WATER
FIGHT THREATENS TOWNS
Arkansas Valley Towns are Very
Much Worried Over Approach
ing Suit.

ton districts are the ones directly
interested in and exercised over the
water fight with Kansas, the SYM
pathy of all irrigated districts is
with them.
The Western Slope has no special
alarm at present over its water sup
ply being diverted, but there could
come a time when it might have on
its hands much the same problem
which now stirs the east-state farm
ers. For instance: Utah might seek
our water if Kansas wins this fight.
That our people are entitled to
first privileges from the water that
eminates from their own water shed.
is a question of right and justice
which should never be questioned.
That the fund provided by the
legislature with which to carry on
this legal battle for the protection Of
Colorado's water should be forth
coming, is the wish of all irrigat-
ors in the state, for the winning of
the battle is of importance, directly
or indirectly, to every one of them
The towns of Fowler, Manzanola'
Rocky Ford, Swink. La Junta, Las
Animas. Lamar, Granada, Amity
and Holly have grown up and come
into existence as much on account
of the construction of these bitches
as on account of any one circum-
stance. Without these bitches sup
plying the land under them there
would be no excuse for the exis-
tence of many OF these towns.
The relief prayed for in the bill
ic In h.
stance, that the corporation defend
ants own their right to divert water
from the Arkansas river subject to
the right of the complainant to div
ert $50 feet for the Great Eastern
and the South Side ditch in Kansas,
near Garden City, 25O feet being
claimed for the Great Eastern and
100 feet for the South Side. the date
which the complainant claims for
its priority is 1881.
The theory of the complainant Is.
that its bitches We're constructed
prior to the bitches of the defend
ants and that the doctrines of ap-
preparation applies throughout the
length of the river and that Colo
RADIO has no right as a state to de-
cree water to the defendant bitches
without recognizing the claims of
the complainant, and that a federal
court ought to enter a decree to
be administered throughout the
whole river giving the Kansas
bitches a date of priority prior to to
the priorities of the defendant.
In the first decision gained by
Colorado, the gist was as follows
I'VE are satisfied that Colorado
has seriously diminished the water
that used to reach Kansas. But as
between the states, We Will not en-
ploy the riparian doctrine in its
strictest. unvarying form. We will
determine what is just and wise. We
find that on the use of these waters
Colorado has built up cities and farm
communities to point of benefit
much overtopping the injury to Kan
pire. Colorado has gone too far
Since the decision of the Kansas
Colorado case in 1909 the trouble
in allegiance until last
year. Then a company which owns
beet sugar factory near Garden City
came into court on new theroy.
They came on the principle that
they were the owners of earlier
bitches than those in Colorado and
that their early use of the water
to an appropriation or
the water; that the defendants were
all junior to them, and that, as
younger bitches, they must allow
the water of the Arkansas to flow
into Kansas. Behind this action,
backing it and furnishing funds.
there is band of investors in Kan
sas lands The water they demand
is iaentica)ly the same as that which
Colorado won from Kansas three
years ago.
The defendants were the water
officials of Colorado and about
sixteen mutual farmers companies
in Colorado. These Colorado COM
panies are not corporatins in the
ordinary sense. They are co-operat-
i've mutual companies in which each
water user owns a share in the
ditch and is assessed so many dol
lars annually to meet the expenses
of the year If the state gov0n-
ment does not meet the expenses OF
this suit they must be met by what
Is practically house-to-house as
sessment made on the farming popu-
lation from Canon City to tho
state line.
AS the Kansas parties say in
their complaint. they are seeking TO
gain what they hoped that the Kan
as-Colorado case would win for
them but did not. The gaining of 1t
would wipe out of existance towns
and villages and erase from the
state tax rolls millions of taxable
property in the counties OF Fremont,