Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1916-02-14
PROTEST IS SENT
BY WATER USERS
Objections to Contract With
the Utah Construction
Company Are Stated.

The controversy between the settlers
and the Utah Construction company
regarding the retaining of the Big
Lost river project appear to become
more confusing every day. The Big
Lost Rive Water Users association
has forwarded to the land board a
protest against the entering into con-
tract as proposed by the state with
that company. The association mem
bers by unanimous vote directed their
attorneys, Clark g. Brodhead, to file
suit in the state engineers office for
cancellation of the permit of the Utah
Construction company of the date of
1905, which was done today.
Hearing Held Today.
The state land board conducted a
hearing into the projects affairs today.
w. A. Brodhead and Chase A. Clark
appeared for the Big Lost River Water
Users association. and Mackay. K. l..
Moler. president of the Arco CONNER
cial club and Sam Paisley, a prominent
merchant of Arco, appeared on behalf
of the club, the town of Arco and the
settlers. Arco, and the Arco settlers
according to Mr.. Moler, want something
done towards retaining the project.
He informed the land board the set
tiers on the project particularly those
on the Arco end who have been there
for years and paid for part of their
water under contract with the Big Lost
River Irrigation company. are entitled
to a priority right over those settlers
who have come in since 1905, and taken
water out of the river for their home
steads. Mr.. Moler made strong pre-
sentation of the ,Arco view. He de-
clared that the Arco people are for
seeing action taken and would like to
see a contract signed so that work can
commence and the settlers on the prof.
ect given the water they have been
waitin, years for.
Attorneys Clark and Brodhead con-
tended for the rights Of the members
Of the water users association and the
settlers who have come In and made
beneficial use Of the waters Of the Big
Lost river for the purpose of raising
crops on the homesteads. They notified
the board that application to cancel
the permits Of 1905 had been made.
Senator Ravenel Macbeth also ad-
dressed the board on behalf of these
settlers.
The Utah Construction company,
through its attorney, Edwin Snow,
agreed to extend the time for sur
render of the old contracts from May
l, 1916. to later date. it was argued
such limited date was an injustice
to the old contract holders and placed
them in a position OF losing all rights
in connection with their entries.
The protest to the proposed contract
is on the following grounds:
That the contract proposed to be
signed is against public policy.
That the water permits mentioned in
said proposed contract have been con-
tested and are n litigation.
That there is no water in Big Lost
river or Antelope creek to supply any
water under the terms and conditions
of said permits us said permits do not
call for any of the storage of said flood
waters, but are simply applications for
permits from the normal flow and that
the normal flow has all been appro-
priated.
Protestants also make the resolution
hereto attached a part of this protest:
Wherefore, Protestants pray that the
said state land board refuse to enter
Into such contract until such time that
the water rights of said Utah Con-
struction company are settled as to
their rights under said permits, and
until such time that the land board
may investigate the truth of this pro-
test.
Causes for Cancellation.
The following causes for cancella-
ton Of the water permit to Big Lost
river are set forth:
First-That the Utah Construction
company is a corporation duly organ
lied and existing under and by virtue
Of the laws of the state of Utah.
Second-That your petitioners, and
each of them, are the holders of a per-