Rocky Ford enterprise., 1915-04-30
KANsAs-coLoRADo SUIT
Defense is Being Heard-claims
: Irrigation Puts More Water
in Arkansas Than Before

l
H. C. Walt of Denver, master ex-
aminer, opened the hearing of testi-
mony for the defense in the Kansas
| Colorado water suit at Pueblo last.
Friday morning
Amongst the first witnesses heard
were Frank Wilson and William Will
son of La Junta, who gave evidence
in regard to the condition of the Ar
kansas river in Kansas in the pioneer
days and also testified in regard to
the effect on the river flow the taxi
ing out of the late water rights in
| Colorado has had.
| Another carly witness was H. w.
Potter, one of the early pioneers who
in the early days travelled extensively
up and down the Arkansas river. He
testified that many times the Arkan-
sag river was practically dry in Kan
sas and that the fact that there was
not sufficient water flowing into Kan
sas was not the fault of too much
being taken from the Arkansas river
by the Colorado bitches but because
OF secpage and waste.
AS readers of The Enterprise are
aware, the Colorado-Kansas water
suit is a case brought by water users
| in Kansas against water users in Col
orado to determine whether or not
state boundaries have any effect on
water rights.
The Kansas water users who have
water rights in the Arkansas river
will contend in the suit that their
rights should be given preference over
| Colorado rights of a later date than
the Kansas rights. They will claim
that the Arkansas river water should
not be appropriated in Colorado ii
| already appropriated in Kansas.
In defense the Colorado water us
ers will claim the Arkansas river is
dry in Kansas during the most of the
irrigation season and that the appro-
priation of the water in Colorado does
not effect the volume of water in
Kansas. 1t will be the effort of Col
orado water users to prove that even
il the water was not appropriated in
this state it would sink into the sand
and be taken up by evaporation long
before it reached the points of diver
sion stipulated by the Kansas claim
ants.
The Colorado water users are al
leging that the state. in which the
| river has its source has first claim
|
shown the river would be dry at
considerable distance from its source,
, say for example the Arkansas river
in Kansas, the water should properly
J be used near the source where its use
is effective and at points of diversion
where it can be found in the river
I during the irrigation period. 1t will
7 also be contcndcd that the water used
for irrigation in Colorado to large
extent finds its way back into the Ar
kansas river before the river reaches
Kansas and that the water can be
used in Colorado and also in Kansas
without detrimcnt to either state.
The claim will be made that the big
storage projects in this state which
/ impound the water in flood seasons
/ and discharge it into the river and
irrigation bitches during the dry sea-
son, actually put more water in the
/ Arkansas river in the irrigation peri
cd than passed down the river thru
! Kansas before there was any irriga-
ton in Colorado. An effort will be
made to show by creditable witnesses
that irrigation in Colorado has ac-
tually increased the water in the river
in the irrigation season, and has thus
been of benefit rather than disad-
vantage to the holders of water rights
/ IN Kansas.
The evidence being gathered now
not being made public for the reason
that it will be submitted later in court.
One witness for Colorado is at pres
ent serving as mayor of Kansas
town. In giving his deposition he
states that in the summer of 1860 he
rode a horse across the Arkansas
river at several points without get
ting the animals feet wet. At that
time there was very little irrigation
water being used in either state and
most OF the water rights that are
plaintiffs in the case of at issue date
from periods later than 1860.
There is little alarm felt in this
state over the outcome OF the suit
But every effort is being made to pre-
pare the case and get the evidence
in such shape that it can be presented
to jury intelligently.
More than S25,000.000 worth of ir-
rigated land in Colorado is depending
for water on the rights that are now
being contested by the Kansas water
users and the suit is probably the
most important ever instituted in the
history of irrigation.