The Raymer enterprise., 1922-10-12
COURT DENIES
REHEARINC
U. S, SUPREME COURT ORDERED
MINOR CHANGES IN THE
DECREE.
WATER ALLOWANCE CUT
poUDRE IRRIGATION DISTRICT
RANCHES RESTRICTED TO
LARAMIE RIVER USE.

Washlngton.-Th Supreme Court
denied the plication Of the state OF
| Colorado and others for Il rehearing
| of the origi.al case brought by
the state of Wyoming, arising out of
| the diversion of the waters of the Lar
| annie river in which the court fixed the
rule that priority OF appropriation was
controlling in establishing the right to
use water taken from interstate
streams, but, ordered certain minor
changes in the decree.
Without changing its position on the
priority Of appropriation principle an
nOunced in its decision Of June >, last,
AS applying TO the use Of water from
| interstate streams for use for irriga-
ton. the court directed that its original
| opinion be modified in certain respects.
Under the notifications the state OF
| Colorado and the other parties joining
with the state in the suit would be re-
stricted to the use of 1850 acre feet
of water per annum from the Laramie
river, through what Is designated as
the Laramie-Poudre tunnel project; to
| the use of 1900 acre feet of water per
annum through what Is designated as
the sky line ntch appropriation In
! Colorado, and 10 the use Of 4,23O acre
feet of water per anham through the
Meadow Land appropriations shown In
the evidence, but would be permitted
to continue to exercise the right now
existing. which the court declared II
recognized and tO divert from the
headwaters OF Deadman creek. Colo.
RADIO tributary Of the Laramie river,
the relatively small amount of water
appropriated from 1t prior to 1902,
through what is designated as the VII.
son Supply ditch.
The notifications to the decree alse
authorized Colorado and Wyoming. OF
any one recognized by either state as
entitled to do so. to continue to exer.
else the right to divert water from
Band creek, in virtue Of any existing
lawful appropriation of waters Of the
creek.
The court imposed the cost Of the
suit as follows
One-third upon Wyoming. one-thirt
upon Colorado, and the other thirt
upon the two corporations which Joined
Colorado in the suit.
Following action of the United
States Supreme Court in refusing Il
rehear the COlorado-Wyoming irriga
ton case. ranchers and others Of the
Poudre irrigation district in this state
1t was said, must now content them
selves with only 1850 acre feet Of wa
ter from the Laramie river.
The dispute has been hanging in the
courts for a number of years and has
attracted nationwide attention be
cause of the matters at stake. The
suit was started originally by Colorado
against Wyoming to obtain what wal
called an equitable proportion OF thu
waters for irrigation purposes from the
Laramie river in Wyoming.
This state alleged that as sover
eighty 1t should not be compelled to
abide by priority rights with reference
to the diversion of water from the Lar.
annie river. 1t contended II should be
allowed to use a fair share Of thu
stream.
Attorney General Keyes said he
looked upon the case as victory as
well as defeat for the state.
In this suit, Colorado sought to oh.
tain from 10000 to $1,000 acre feet OF
water from the Laramie river, but the
high court has decreed that 1880 is
fair share in view of other priorities,'
he asserted.
I'VE have lost our argument that
rights between states should be settled
on a basis of equitable proportion
ment," he continued, "but have won on
the contention that we have the right
to divert water from one water shed
to another"