Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-12-13
RECLAMATION WORK
Numbered BY LACK
or WATER RECORDS
Indefinite Data as to Owner
ship Prevents Project Plans,
Is Claim.

Helena, Dec. 12.-(Bp The .Associ-
ated Press.)-One of the great him
ORANGES to irrigation development in
Montana is the unsatisfactory eondi-
ton Of water rights and water right
records, according to q statement by
the state board of railroad commits
sioners, the members of which are, ex-
efficio, the state irrigation commission.
..This commission has made numer-
Gus Investigations of water supplies
and water rights in connection with
irrigation projects says the state
ment. land in most cases such inves-
LEGATIONS are greatly handicapped by
lack of definite water rights records.
water rights in Montana are of
three classes: those awarded by court
decree. those evidenced by recorded
appropriations and those having no
record Of title. Only AZ per cent of
the water rights are decreed, while 1S
ner cept have no record title what
ever.
I'm recorded appropriations the law
! nIaces no limit on the amount of water
| which may be claimed and makes no
| nrovisiou for record of abandonment
or forfeiture. The result is that vir-
| tuallv every stream in Montana has
| recorded appropriations claiming from
| five TO so times the total available
slnplv. In such cases the official
| records are worse than useless, and
serve only TO discourage legitimate de-
| veIopment and cast discredit upon some
! Of the best water rights on the stream.
1903 Different Offices
| water filings are now recorded
- -J a-I ,aaor1or in nnah
| county and decreed water rights are
| filed with the clerk of the court. This
/ means that there are 1OS different of
| fees in the state for the Keeping OF
water right records, with no uniformity
Of records and no provision tor proper
indexing Of the rights.
lin investigating projects on large
streams, records must often be
searched in 10 or Il different offices
and this supplemented by IN examina
ton of the irrigated lands to deter
mine the actual use. The investlga-
tion is therefore much more expensive
and the results less certain than would
be the case if Montana had a modern
water code similar to that of other
western states, in which definite water
right records for the entire state are
kept in one central office.
because Of these unsatisfactory wa
ter laws the commission has adopted
the policy of approving only such pro
iects as are unquestionably good. and
in some cases has advised delay in
construction until uncertainties IN the
matter of water right could be re-
moved
No Proof Provision
In the report on the projected Fish
Greek irrigation district in Golden Val
lev and Wheatland counties, issued re
Gently. the commission said:
Whatever the cause. the fact re-
mains that the available water Of Fish
creek is not being utilized. All OF the
present irrigation along this stream
takes only a small part of the flow
and represents only a trifling percent
age of the total decreed water rights,
yet is must not be supposed that this
water may be freely taken for the use
of the proposed irrigation district.
While it is very probable that this wa
ter will not be used for many years
to come, vet under the present law
the fact that it is decreed serves as
/ notice to the world to keep hands off
and let this water continue to 20 to
| waste as it has done for many years
past.
1.-The a~ntiquated water laws which
still prevail in Montana make no pro
vision for proof or proper record OF
abandonment, and the courts have
placed no time limit in the matter of
forfeiture for non use. Thus in the
case of Fish creek there is always
the possibility that these decreed rights
after lying dormant for a generation,
may at any time be revived. to the det-
riment Of any project depending upon
d present annronriatiOn Of this water