The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1919-05-22
BIG WATER CASE
is UNDER WAY
COCHRAN FINISHES LOCAL HEARING
case TO go TO Circuit Court Mater is
Wasted IN Irrigation is Charged
BY Power Company

BY Power Company
Although lawsuit iniatited hy test
lmony taken the past week by Geo. T.
Cochran, Of the State Water Board.
who was accompanied by the boards
secretary, K. W. Potter. was charac-
terized by friendly round table ses-
slons of Mr.. Cochran and attorneys for
adverse interests, il viii set a record
for local civil litigation Indeed the
suit, which will end in an ad dludleation
Of all water rights in the Hood river
watershed. will probably involve
greater property interests than any
similar case ever tried in the state A
number of irrigation eases. among
them the Powder River adjudication,
which is familiar 10 all irrigation at
torneys of the northwest, have in
volved more extensive territory. but
the papers filed in the proceedings in
stituted here draw lin practically the
entire assessed valuation, an approx
mate SO, 600, 600
The big case has resulted from con-
tested claims between horticultural ir-
rigation systems and power concerns
The Oregon Lumber Co., the Dee mill
Of which is driven 10y electrical power
developed from waters of the East and
Middle Forks of Hood river and which
is located lust below the confluence of
the forks, sought TO restrain the East
Fork Irrigation District, supplying an
approximately 1000 acres Of the coun-
tvs oldest bearing orchards, from
maxim full use of the water claimed.
alleging that the company had lost its
rights 10y failure to make "a reasonably
diligent appropriation of the waters
claimed.
While decision Of the late Circuit
Judge W. L. Bradshaw went against
the plaintiff lumber company, the su-
preme court remanded the case to the
circuit court, and since the proceed
ngs of the litigants had given an intl-
nation of similar litigation to follow,
the supreme court instructed that the
State Water Board secure full testi-
mony on all contested claims ard gath
er complete data on irrgable land of
watershed and the flows Of all streams.
The Water Board spent more than
two years in gathering this data. Fol.
lowing the hearing Of this week, the
Board will supply all parties with
transcripts of claims presented, and
in 30 days attorneys will file briefs
with the Board which will then render
its decision, merely a suggestive one
for the guidance of the court of Circuit
Judge Wilson, before whom the case
will automatically proceed. Once in
court argument will be heard as in any
formal lawsuit. However, if it APP
pears that further testimony is needed
that portion of the case will again 20
back to the Water Board for the pro.
duction of proofs. The case is expected
to go to the circuit court some time
this fall. Following a decision of the
lower court appeals may be made to
the supreme court.
After the sessions of attorneys here
this week the feeling exists that the
case will be settled satisfactorily to
all interests concerned, and that the
final adjudication, while it will un
doubtedly effect a conservation of wa
ter, Will not curtail the use of any irri-
cation system or power company to
such an extent AS to result in injury to
business. Indeed, the outstanding fea-
ture OF the week S proceedings was
te Introduction of testimony by J. c.
Stephens, an irrigation engineer and
reclamation expert, who appeared in
behalf of the Pacific Power d Light
Co. Mr.. Stephens testified that irriga-
tion concerns were applying water in
wasteful manner With the exception
of the Hood River Irrigation District,
Mr. Stephens claims that he finds that
the claims of all horticultural interests
are in excess of actual needs, but that
| the district cited Is IN need of more
water for the body of land under its
system.
The only feature Of the case that
raises any alarm on the part of lrriga
tionists comes from the claim of the
Pacific Power & Light Co. for $50 sec.
ond feet of water in Hood river on the
grounds Of riparian ownership. The
irrigationists. who are headed by Capt.
Wilbur, secretary Of the East Fork lr
rgatim District, deny the application
of the doctrine of riparian rights. how
ever, and assert that the power con-
cern can only claim the maximum Of
water actually used prior to other
| claimants. The state water engineer s
statistics show that the plants now
operated by the power concern have a
maximum need of only 800 second feet.
Capt. Wilbur during the progress of
the weeks proceedings asked to CON
test claims Of the Middle Fork Irrga-
ton Co., which takes its waters from
the Middle Fork above the plant of the
Dee mill of the oregon Lumber Co.
/ AT;lIttr taA 5la
East Fork Irrigation District's claims
to water were prior to those of the
Middle Fork Co., the lumber company,
deriving its head from both forks Of
the stream, had not filed any claim
against the latter concern for the
reason that it was interested in logged
off lands, now being offered for sale,
under the Middle Fork ditch. He
asked to contest the Middle Fork rights
for the reason, as he asserted, that any
concessions granted it would result in
a decrease of water for use of the East
Fork ditch While Commissioner
Cochran denied the interjection of the
contest at the week 5 sitting, he eX-
planned that it might be made on
orders of the circuit court when the
case reached that stage
4 In his testimony State Water Engin-
eer Cupper declared that the dam Of
the Oregon Lumber Co, at Dee was
wasting ia second feet of water
almost enough to irrgate the East
Side orchards.
Because Of the magnitude Of the
properties involved and Of the antici-
patton on the part of lrrlgationists for