The Delta independent., 1915-11-26
An Important
Drainage Decision

A decision which is very important
to people who are now or may in the
future become interested in the ques-
tion of draining land, was rendered
by Judge Black on Monday in the
District Court.
One of the questions involved was
whether or not one who has drained
his land and secured a flow OF water
may turn il into depression which
is the natural course of drainage from
the point where the water is develop
ed This matter is important for the
reason that it has been the under
standing by many that waste water
and drainage may be turned into the
natural draws which have carried
away the rain water, and though the
water may run through other peoples
lands the persons who turn the water
into the draws are not responsible.
The case in question was one where
in Ed Keller and his wife applied for
an injunction to have F. H. Miller
nonresident. and Catlin & Blake.
his agents, restrained from allowing
certain drainage water to run over
a tract of land owned by the Kellers
on Spring Greek mesa. There was
natural depression in the Keller land
along which the water must flow, in
which were growing flags and other
such vegetation. The cost OF tilins
the water to and across the Keller
land. and then through other lands
below. until il could be emptied into
some deep draw where it could do no
damage was so great as to be almost.
if not entirely, prohibitive. The de
cision of the court was in verbal
form and substantially as follows
The law is that each owner must
take care of his waste water and
drainage water if in running over any
other persons land it does any dam
age. 1t is therefore necessary that
the defendant procure a right of way
[ for his drainage water. | will take
( this case under adyisement for ten
days, during which time the parties
may come to some agreement as to
such right of way. If at the end of
that time no agreement has been
reached. l will probably make an or
| der that the water be stopped by
tearing up the tile in several places
on the defendants land and in his
draining system, and by throwing in
dams according to the plan of Engin-
eer Foster, hold the water in defend
ants land the same as ii was before
the draining was done. ] do not like
to make such an order. but the defend
ant having done the draining before
getting a right of way, can not now
demand the right to conduct the water
over or through plaintiffs land, and
this though he was led to believe that
/ by the payment of the sum of $500
4 he would be given that privilege"
| On the rendition of the decision the
defendants leading counsel. F. d.
Catlin. gave notice that if no agree
ment could be arrived at within five
days. the defendants would start con-
I demnation proceedings for the purpose
| of securing right of way by court
decree.
This case is important for the reas-
on that il illustrates the necessity
Z of a public drainage system in which
any person wishing TO drain his land
may have place to dump his water.
No person can drain his land where
! there is any considerable amount of
/ land below him which would make the
cost Of right of way. together with
| that of ditching or tilins too great.
I This case notifies all persons that he
who drains must take care of the
water he develops so that il Will not
damage any person below.-Montrose
| Enterprise.