Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1922-07-05
Big Ditch Project
Is Dismissed By
Order of Court
CONTINUED from rrst page)

engineer OF luz ana lOo ana also NIL.
Geo. Walker another engineer who
was familiar with this territory.
Other persons appeared and objected
to the proceedings. The main conten-
tion however at the hearing was as
to what courses the proposed ditch
should take. Two systems or plans
were urged at the hearing, one to
enlarge the channel of Thief River
and build some five or six laterals
extending east and west and to build
certain laterals in the vicinity OF
Thief Lake: the other plan was to
make partial improvement of Thief
River, do the work specified in the
Thief Lake neighbOrhoOd, and to con-
struct diagonal ditch running north
east and southwest between points in
the town Of Veldt, Eckvoll, Mud Lake
and Grain Plain or Agder. OF sub
stantially in that location, and to emp
ty the east and west laterals east of
this diagonal ditch into the same as
far as possible. It was deemed adj
visable by the parties interested, by
Mr.. Willard and by the Red Lake
Drainage and Conservancy District
that both routes be surveyed and re-
ported upon. The recommendation OF
the Red Lake Drainage and Conserv-
ancy district reads as follows:
"Resolution adopted by Red Lake
Drainage and Conservancy District
Board at Warren, Minnesota, on April
1, 1920 in relation to establishment
of certain drainage bitches in Mar
shall, Beltrami and Pennington Coun-
ties lying within the territory en-
ibraced by said district.
"Be it resolved, First, that this
Board recognizes that the drainage
proceedings for the establishment and
consolidation of bitches 1O2, 103 and
80 are under the judicial ditch act
under proceedings begun before this
Board was established, and that there
fore it has no authority in this mat
ter r. ". ~ ,9
, s'Second, that the attendance Of said
Board at the preliminary hearing on
March 81 and April 1 was for the
purpose of ascertaining the facts in
connection with this project.
1'Third, that, as in the opinion OF
all of the members of said Board, the
;. territory embraced by the proceedings
as was shown by the testimony at
the hearing, is in need of additional
drainage bitches, particularly all ade-
quate outlet; it is recommended that
a plan to improve the drainage Of
this territory be carried out. The
Board, however, feels it is unable to
determine which Of the two proposed
plans is the better until a detailed
survey is made but is of the opinion
that the modified diagonal plan will
best meet the needs Of the area af-
,os, .111c,in will q
made at final hearing.
IF Fourth, that in view Of the fact
that the Court has the power to- di-
rect this Board to assume the con-
struction Of this project if finally es-
tablished we believe it would be only
fair to the board to have the plans
for the project approved by the en-
gineer selected by the Board before
the final establishment of the ditch
system and we request that such ap-
proval be had .s
Fifth, that ditch No. 80 be not
consolidated with Nos. 102 and 1O3
(Signed) s
= G. G. Selvig, Crookston,
!. President.
Ed. A. Aubol, St. Hilaire,
Andrew Johnson, Gonvick,
ssAxel Nelson, Holt, fsa
s. VIM. PaskeWitz, Grygla. e
It will be noted that two Of these
commissioners reside in the territory
affected BY said Console dated proceed
ings. . #ss 5.Ss3 ii ss
After hearing all Of the evidence at
i this hearing the court was convinced
that under the laws Of this State q
completed survey should be made, and
so ordered. 3 5$s
Fam well satisfied at this time that
Z the petitioners have acted ii good
y faith and that the territory involved
) needs better drainage and In partic-
D Mar q more efficient outlet. The ter
ritory involved Is suitabl Tor but not
safe Tor agri cultural purposes on &C:
count Of spring floods and excessive
u rains Ia the summer inundatfpg the
Y lands. we now. have the completed
Il plans and data for both Of the recon.
Il mended plans, the river and the 81
agonal
When state Ditch No. 50 (being The