The Holbrook news., 1922-10-20
COURT DENIES
 PREPARING
U. S. SUPREME COURT ORDERED MINOR CHANGES IN THE
 DEGREE.
WATER ALLOWANCE GUT
POUDRE IRRIGATION DISTRICT RANCHES RESTRICTED TO
 LARAMIE RIVER USE.

Washington.-The Supreme Court | denied the plicatiOn of the state of Colorado and others for 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, hut ordered certain minor changes in the decree.
 Without changing it's position on the priority of appropriation principle an nOunced in it's decision of June ,, last. as applying to the use of water from interstate streams for use for irriga ton, the court directed that it's 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 15,500 acre feet. of water per annlIm from the Laramie river, through what is designated as tllt OutIc tG!llGl DiOJCtl to the use of 1S,000 acre feet of water per annum through what is designated as the sky line Litch appropriation in Colorado, and to the use of 4,250 acre feet of water per anhum 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 it recognized and to divert from the headwaters of Deadman creek, a Colo radO tributary of the Laramie river, the relatively small amount of water appropriated from it prior to 1902, through what is designated as the Will son Supply ditch.
 The notifications to the decree also authorized Colorado and Wyoming, or 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-thrd upon Colorado, and the other third upon the two corporations which joined Colorado in the suit.
 Following action of the United States Supreme Court in refusing to rehear the Colorado-WyOming irriga- tion case. ranchers and others of the Poudre irrigation district in this state, it was said, must now content them selves with only l5.5O0 acre feet of wa ter from the Laramie river.
 The dispute has been hanging in the courts for 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 was called an equitable proportion of the waters for irrigation purposes from the Laramie river in Wyoming.
 This state alleged that as sOver- eighty it should not be compelled to abide by priority rights with reference to the diversion of water from the Lar annie river. IL contended it should be allowed 10 use fair share of the stream.
 Attorney General Reyes said he looked upon the case as victory as well as defeat for the state.
 In this suit, Colorado sought to ob- tain from 3O,OO0 10 50O00 acre feet of water from the Laramie river, but the high court has decreed that 15,5OO is d fair share in view of other priOrities," he asserted.
 We 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"