The Idaho Republican. [volume] (Blackfoot, Idaho) 1904-1932, 1924-03-27

and August of 1919, the natural
water users were only given 437 zoo
acre It. OF water, at Heise, or 272,-
900 acre It, less than they received
during the same period of much
lower year, and remember that the
storage water was, at this time be-
ing charged with this same II per
cent loss which Mr.. Meeker says is
Sufficient. OF course, we were given
the privilege of buying some of the
272,00O acre IT, back at 81 per acre
1T. Now, how do you want this
question settled, are you acceptable
| to the Meeker recommendation,
which obligates the natural water
user to stand all loss in excess of
I2h per cent In this section, or do
you feel that the natural water users
water at Heise which they had there
before the river was interfered with,
when type of year and additional
acreage irrigation above are con-
| sidered?
In regard to the recommended
loss of one-half of one per cent on
storage water from Heise to Wood
Vile: First, it is quite apparent
from observation that the only way
in which this storage water can be
run thru this gravelly section of
fifty miles, with only one-half of l
per cent loss, is to force the natural
water to stand all that loss except
the one-half of 1 per cent. Just COM
pare this fifty mile section with the
forty mile section, Woodville to
Blackfoot, where records have indi-
cd 10
or twelve times the proposed loss for
this section. Second, by using Mr.. |
Meeker's records and his statement |
in his printed article on Return |
Flow From Irrigation Development
we find by the great feeder to
Lorenzo data that the average depth |
to the water in August was 1913 feet,
and that the average depth to the
ground water in May was 25.4 feet,
showing filling up of 14.5 feet be-
tween May and August. Now look
at the difference between this and
the section of Lorenzo to Menan
bridge, where the average depth to
the May ground water was IA feet
and the average depth to ground
water in August was 4.3 feet, you
will notice here that the territory
near the mouth of the North Fork
was fairly well saturated even as
early as May and that 1t seemed i'm
possible to raise the ground water
any nearer the ground surface be-
cause the sloughs and rivers were
low enough to draw this water of.
Now Mr.. Meeker has said that rs per
cent of the water diverted will re-
turn to the river of reuse and since
there is about so, 900 acres irrigated
lying between the Great Feeder and
South Teton river, from the hills on
he east to the north fork on the
west) it is reasonable to expect, from
he angle of the ground water sur
ace, that the return flow from this !,
and would enter South Fork be-
ween Lorenzo and Menan Bridge or
North Fork below Rexburg measur-
ng station. Now since the river
rom Heise to Menan Bridge is I
reated as one section, instead OF
at Lorenzo as per request /.
he losses which occur between
Ieise and Lorenzo are balanced by
he gains which come in below
lorenzo from our printing and our Q
irrigation; thence we are asked to
tand about per cent loss on their
forage while they 60 thru for one
alf of 1 per cent. Is this right?
If the river is divided into proper =
ections so that the actual loss can +
q established, we are sure it will be r
reater than the losses found be- =
ween Woodville and Blackfoot sta
lon, which is 6 per cent, but II the =
liver is divided into sections so that a
,sses In one part Of the section can y
e compensated by the gain from ir- r
Igation in other sections, there 1s h
O question but what records can be q
lade to justify the slight charges =
lade against the storage interests h
nd force the natural water users to q
tand the burden of loss on storage a
,ater. Now 1t is up to you water :,
sers to say whether you care to
land for this sort of practice or not. =,
In regard to the per cent loss on G,
forage water from Woodvflle to b.
lackfoot as recommended by Mr.. a
[eeker, a study of the available s
ecords would indicate that this loss s
reasonably correct, however, 1t Is T
ard ITO understand why the section Il
rom Jackson Lake to Woodvilie, 81
'hich is forty-five times the length ii
{ this section should only stand half Il
5 much loss as this forty mile sec st
on, the principal reason seems to
Continued on page 8 P
\