Daily independent. [volume] (Elko, Nev.) 188?-1915, 1913-12-03
THE MARYS RIVER PROJECT
Humboldt Nevada,

NSAA ia oSS SuS SNASSA "a
the Wells Herald has constituted
himself champion of the State En-
gineer in his attitude against the
Carey Reclamation Association.
The article you published in your
paper from me was not written in
the heat of passion. / knew, and
notified the Board of Directors
the State Engineer was going to
end the Mary's River project in
October. Every statement l made
in the article I have proofs Of, and
most of them are over the State
Engineers own signature.
AS the Herald has a copy of the
report Of the state engineer, l
crave space in your paper to point
out some statements in it, and what
h did to be able to make them.
Before the state will file applica-
ton for Temporal airy segregation of
lands in the U. S. Land Office, the
State Engineer must make an ex-
animation of the proposed pro- ject,
and report favorably upon it. The
Assistant State Engineer, acting
under orders of the State Engineer
and thus becoming dc facto State
Engineer in May 1911 made a
thorough examination of the two
reservoirs and dam sites, the canal
line, and land to be irrigated and
reported the plans perfectly feas-
ible from an engineering stand
point, and that the cost would be
about $4,000 an acre for the land
asked for; making it feasible f ON
a financial pint - and that there
was an ample supply Of water for
the land, not otherwise appropriate
ed. The State Engineer now finds
water for less than half the land,
and cost $500 an acre.
Measurements have been taken of
the flow of the st. Mary's River
at several points under the super
vision of the U. S. Geological Sur
Vey. At the request Of the Presi-
dent and Secretary Of the Carey
Reclamation Association. the Dis
-trict Engineer of the u. S. Geolog-
ical Survey, very kindly wrote to
the State Engineer, giving him
the compiled data he had, and
showing that, after allowing the
present irrigated Ian Is on the river
all the water now being used on
them,-there was remaining a sur
plus flow of $4,000 acre-faet of
water at the head of the proposed
canal for the Mary's River project.
The State Engineer claims there
is only $4,000 acre feet in all flow
ing at the canal head, He then al
lows tho irrigated lands below a
second supply of that water, and
fiLds there is $1,000 acre-feet of
water only for the project.
Our State law provides that a
company must file its maps. plans,
estimates of costs, etc, with the
State Land Register. He must
give them to the State Engineer
for examination and approval. II
he does not approve them or
any part he must at once return
them to the company for correc-
ton, and the company must make
such corrections and re-file. A
minimum Of ninety-days is allowed
for this.
February, 1912, the company FL
ed all its maps, plans, estimates of
costs, etc, as required and they
we're the same day handed to the
State Engineer. He held them
eighty-nine days, and then return
ed them to the Register, without
objectjng tn one item or statement
in them. A month later, he assisted
in writing letter, which was filed
in the U. s. Land Office, in which
it is stated that the company had
met all the requirements of the
State Laws, which meant that its
maps, plans, etc., had all been ex.
amined and approved by the State