DKIWUTMI VI OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 OFFICi iN N,K W ' 
 
 IRRIGATION FROM Bid THOMPSON RIVER. 
 
 JOHN E. FIEL^ 
 
 [iisidunt Mai* I. 
 
 otoradj. 
 
 d5»x-->W'^ T - 
 
 ;, >,fogi^ 
 
 DEPOSITORY 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFtflQE. 
 
 1 902. 
 
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS OF THE OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS ON 
 
 IRRIGATION." 
 
 Bui. 36. Notes on Irrigation in Connecticut and New Jersey. By C. S. Phelps and 
 
 F. P>. Vobrhees. Pp. ( >-F Price, 10 cents. 
 Bui. 58. Water Rights on the Missouri Riverand its Tributaries. ByElwood Mead. 
 
 Pp. 80. Price. II) cent-. 
 Bui. 60. jLbstractof Laws for Acquiring Titles to Water, froni t lie .Missouri River and 
 
 its Tributaries, with the Legal Forms in ( tee. < lompiled by Elwood Mead. 
 
 Pp. 77. Price, L0 cents. 
 Bui. 70. Water-Righl Problemsof Bear-River. By Clarence T. Johnston and Joseph 
 
 A. I .reckons. 1*}). 40. Price. 15 cents. 
 Bul. 73. Irrigation in the Rocky Mountain '.States'. By J. C. Olrich. Pp.64. Pi 
 
 10 cents. 
 
 Bul. 81. The Use of Water in Irrigation in Wyoming. By I!. ('. Buffum. Pp. 56. 
 
 Price, 10 cents. 
 Bul. S(>. The Use of Water in Irrigation. Report of investigations made in i 
 
 under the supervision of Klwood Mead, expert in charge, and C. T. .Join - 
 
 ston, assistant. Pp. 263. Price, 30 cents. 
 Bul. 87. Irrigation in New Jersey. By Kdward B. Yoorhees. Pp. 40. Price. 5 
 
 cents. 
 Bul. 90. Irrigation in Hawaii. P>y Walter Maxwell. Pp.48. Price, 10 cents. 
 Bul. 92. The Reservoir System ot' the Cache la Poiidre Valley. By E. S. Nettletott. 
 
 Pj). 4S. Price, 15 cents. 
 Bul. 96. Irrigation Laws of the Northwest Territories of Canada and Wyoming, with 
 
 Discussions by J. S. Dennis, Fred Pond, and J. M. Wilson. Pp. 90. 
 
 Price, 10 cents. 
 Bul. 100. Report of Irrigation Investigations in California, under the direction of 
 
 Klwood Mead, assisted by William K. Smythe, Marsden Manson, J. M. 
 
 Wilson, Charles D. Marx, Frank Soule, C. E. (irunsky, Edward M. B 
 
 and .lames 1) ' '. uvler. Pp.411. Price, cloth, si. 25; pap er, 9[ ^ it< 
 Bul. 104. Thel'seof r in v ± «igation, Report of investigations m ut( j e m |, )()() 
 
 under supervision o. v '\\ood Mead. expert in charge lU( | ^ r£ j () ] in ^ 
 
 ^ ,., assistant. Pp. 3B4. . -wv, 50 cents. 
 Bul. 105. ' Ration in the United States -..vol F ood Meadj irrigatipn 
 
 expert m charge, before the United States limastrial Commission June 
 
 11 and 12, 1901. Pp. 47, Price, 15 cents;. 
 
 Bul. 10S. Irrigation Practice among Fruit ( irowers on the Pacific Coast. Bv E J 
 
 Wickson. Pp. 54. Price, 15 cents. 
 Bul. 113. Irrigation ol Rice in the Inited States. Bv Frank Bond and George H 
 
 Keeney. Pp. 77. In press. 
 
 lAK.MKKs' BULLETINS. 
 
 Pan. In. irrigation in Humid (Miniates. P,v F. 1 1. Kin- Pp.27 
 
 '""I. m. lirig ; ,tion in Fruit Growing. P,v E. .1. Wirkson. Pp, 48 
 
 P>ul. i;5S. Irrigation in Field and Garden. By F. J. Wicks,,,,. Pp 40 
 
 Bul. 158. II, ) U to Build Small Irrigation Ditches. By C. T. Johnston and J I) 
 
 Stannard. pp. 28. 
 
 " For !h„^ puhheations to Which a price is atlixed application should he made to 
 t !«■ SnponoM.dent of Documents, I'nioii IUiiMing, Washington, D. Q., the officer 
 designated l»y Jaw to sell Gfrovernmenl publications. 
 
s 
 
U. S. Dept. of At-r , Bu! 1 18 Office of Expt. Stations. Irrigation Instigations. FRONTISPIECE 
 
 \\ 
 
 mtestigkti 
 
 VJ 
 
U. S. DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE. 
 
 OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS-BULLETIN NO. 118. 
 
 A. C. TRUE, Director. 
 
 liUIGATION FROM BIG THOMPSON RIVER. 
 
 BY 
 
 JOHN E. FIELD, 
 
 Assistant State Engineer of Colorado. 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 GOVEKNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. 
 1902. 
 
OFFICE OF EXPERIMENT STATIONS. 
 
 A. C. True, Ph. D., Director. 
 
 E. W. Allen, Ph. D., Assistant Director. 
 
 [rbigation investigations. 
 
 Elwood Mead, ( ' ; 
 
 ( !. T. Johnston, Assistant < '/■ 
 
 J. M. Wilson. ■ <j< of Calif ornia Oft 
 
 R. P. Teele, Editorial Assistant. 
 
 Clarence E. Tait. Assistant in Chargi of Maps and Ittustrai 
 
 A. P. Stover. . 
 
 J. D. Stannard, Assistant. 
 
 Frank Adams, Agent and Expert 
 
 Frank Bond, Agent and Expert 
 
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 
 
 U. S. Department of Agmoultubb, 
 
 Office of Experiment Stations. 
 
 Washington, I). C, June 16, 1002. 
 Sir: I have the honor to .submit for publication a report on irriga- 
 tion from Big Thompson River, Colorado, prepared under the direc- 
 tion of Prof. Elwood Mead, expert in charge of irrigation investiga- 
 tions, by John E. Field, assistant State engineer of that State. 
 
 The farmers of northern Colorado have made a more complete use 
 of their water supply than is made in any other part of the United 
 States except California. This development has brought out many 
 interesting features in the practical workings of the Colorado system 
 of water laws. The report deals largely with the legal status of water 
 rights in the Big Thompson Valley, and in the State of Colorado as a 
 whole. 
 
 Mr. Field's official connection with water administration in Colo- 
 rado makes him especially well qualified to discuss this subject. It is 
 through studies of this character that the people of Colorado and of 
 the West can perfect their irrigation systems and secure the highest 
 development of their resources. 
 
 It is recommended that this report be published as a bulletin of this 
 Office. 
 
 Respectfully, A. C. True, 
 
 Director. 
 Hon. James Wilson, 
 
 Secretary of Agriculture. 
 
 3 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Introduction 9 
 
 Physical characteristics 11 
 
 Water supply 12 
 
 1 titches ----- IS 
 
 The Bijr Thompson Ditch 20 
 
 Mariano Ditch 21 
 
 The Big Thompson Manufacturing Company's Ditch 21 
 
 The Farmers' Irrigating Ditch 23 
 
 The Big Thompson Irrigating Ditch 28 
 
 The Loveland and Greeley Canal 24 
 
 The Big Thompson and Platte River Ditch 25 
 
 Kist and Goss I >it<h 26 
 
 Hill and Brush Ditch 26 
 
 The London Ditch 26 
 
 The ( reorge Rist Ditch 27 
 
 The Hillsboro Ditch 27 
 
 The I landy Ditch 28 
 
 The South Side Ditch 29 
 
 The Home Supply Ditch 29 
 
 Reservoirs 30 
 
 Reservoirs under the Loveland and Greeley Canal 35 
 
 Lake Loveland 35 
 
 The Big Cut Reservoir 37 
 
 Darrough Lake 37 
 
 The Sanborn reservoirs, Nos. 1 and 2 37 
 
 Reservoirs under the Loudon Ditch 38 
 
 Benson Lake 38 
 
 The Bental 38 
 
 Seven Lakes, Loudon and Boyd lakes 38 
 
 Reservoirs under the Handy Ditch 40 
 
 Frank Loveland Reservoir 40 
 
 The De France Reservoir 40 
 
 The Kee Reservoir 40 
 
 The Brown Reservoir 40 
 
 The Wilson Reservoir _ 41 
 
 The Hupp Lake Reservoir 41 
 
 The Hupp Reservoir 41 
 
 The Berthoud Town Lake 41 
 
 The Jansen Reservoir 41 
 
 Hummel Lake 41 
 
 Beasley Lake 41 
 
 The Welch reservoirs 41 
 
 The Chapman Reservoir 42 
 
 Reservoirs under the Home Supply Canal 42 
 
 5 
 
Page. 
 
 Duty of water 44 
 
 Seepage 46 
 
 Administration and distribution 49 
 
 Titles to water 52 
 
 I aws 56 
 
 Litigation 62 
 
 First scries of contests 65 
 
 Scc.nd scries of contests 67 
 
 ( Mher litigation 69 
 
 New Loveland and Greeley Land and Irrigation C<». v. Home Supply 
 
 Co 68 
 
 Lower Latham Ditch Co. v. Loudon Irrigating Co. et al 70 
 
 Comments 71 
 
 Conclusion 75 
 
ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 PLATES. 
 
 Page. 
 
 Dam and head gate of Handy Ditch, Big Thompson River Frontispiece 
 
 Plate I. Map of Big Thompson Valley 10 
 
 II. Dam and head works, Home Supply Ditch, Big Thompson River. . . 28 
 
 III. Outlet tower, Lake Loveland 34 
 
 IV. Fig. 1. — Outlet of Lone Tree Reservoir. Fig. 2. — Weir just below 
 
 outlet of Lone Tree Reservoir 44 
 
 V. Fig. 1. — Mariano Reservoir. Fig. 2. — Dam of Mariano Reservoir. . 44 
 
 TEXT FIGURE. 
 
 Fig. 1. Diagram showing the water supply from Big Thompson Creek, and the 
 
 manner of its use .'!2 
 
 7 
 

IRRIGATION FROM BIG THOMPSON RIVER. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 The examination and study of the Big Thompson was undertaken in 
 preference to that of other streams for the reason that it presents 
 many features not found in other districts and at the same time is 
 free from modifying influences and conditions not related to strictly 
 agricultural pursuits or their attendant industries. 
 
 The district presents a well-developed and substantial set of local 
 customs and regulations, which appear, moreover, to be sensible and 
 well calculated to produce good results, as evidenced by the consider- 
 able length of time they have been in vogue and which have been 
 found to meet the requirements of the people. 
 
 That portion of the river on which the head gates are located is not 
 very extensive (PL I), and in consequence the matter of regulation of 
 the proper amount of water to be turned into each is much simplified. 
 No great sand bars exist in the river, and its channel is excellent, 
 making the loss of water by evaporation or seepage small. 
 
 The art of farming is as well advanced as in any section of the 
 State, and over the entire district there is a notable absence of any- 
 thing approaching thriftlessness in the methods used. The spirit of 
 orderliness is very apparent in the arrangement of the farm surround- 
 ings and in the neatness with which the farms, large and small, are 
 kept up. 
 
 There is a great diversity of crops; nearly everything grown in 
 Colorado can be found. Near and just inside the first line of foothills 
 are found thrifty and profitable orchards, and. while most of the farms 
 have more or less of an orchard, those at the base of the mountains 
 are especially noteworthy. Small fruit and garden truck are raised in 
 quantities for the markets. It is the center of the lamb-feeding dis- 
 trict, probably 100,000 head being fed on alfalfa each winter, and 
 many cattle also are wintered and fattened here. Wheat, oats. rye. 
 barley, and corn for grain; alfalfa, timothy, clover, and the native 
 grasses of the second bottom as hay. give not only great diversity of 
 farm produce, but of farm labor as well. By intelligent handling the 
 farms are made to produce crops above the general average of the 
 State, and an air of prosperity and energy pervades the community. 
 
 There has been a marked tendency toward more intensive farming 
 
10 
 
 and toward the cutting up of the old and larger farm- into smaller 
 tracts of 80 acres and less. This tendency lias grown in the last two 
 years, and the land has become more valuable with the prospect for 
 and the building of a beet-sugar factory at the town of Loveland. 
 The year L901, the first in which beets were extensively planted, has 
 proved the suitability of the soil and climate to the cultivation of this 
 plant. 
 
 In the future probably few farms here will exceed 4<» acre- in 
 extent; every acre will be under cultivation and be made to yield 
 something more nearly approaching the capacity of the land. Indeed, 
 it appears that the district is incapable of increasing its acreage very 
 much, as practically all the land between the ridge on the north, sep- 
 arating the Cache la Poudre and the Big Thompson rivers, and that 
 on the south, separating the Big Thompson and the Little Thompson. 
 is now under ditch and under cultivation. More than this, tin 1 water 
 discharged from the canyon is barely equal to the demand. In dry 
 years there is grave apprehension of a shortage of irrigating water, 
 and the utmost economy has to be practiced. Indeed, the very effi- 
 cient reservoir systems, which will be spoken of later, are the results 
 of the necessity for more and later water. 
 
 The storage capacity is almost equal to the excess run-off over and 
 above that needed for direct irrigation. Very little water escapes 
 from the district except in seasons of unusual flow and during short and 
 very heavy storms. In the year 1900 every reservoir in the district 
 was full early in the storing season, which is generally in June, and 
 some water passed into other districts: this, however, was exceptional. 
 During the spring of 1901 many of the reservoirs were practically 
 empty until late in the season; copious rains, however, came, and a 
 good run of water was had. tilling the reservoirs to nearly their full 
 capacity, and to the end of the season there was no complaint of the 
 water supply. 
 
 Another consideration in selecting the Big Thompson was that its 
 waters are used almost exclusively for agricultural purposes: there is 
 no mining in the district, with its attendant waste and contamination 
 and with its conflicting interests. In some districts of the State the 
 slimes" from the stamp mills above, together with the sand and gravel 
 of the placers, cause trouble in keeping the ditches in good condition. 
 The slimes in particular are annoying, as they do not settle readily, 
 and so find their way onto the fields and gardens, where they leave an 
 almost impervious sticky coating of scarcely any fertilizing value, but 
 very deleterious to such fruits and vegetables as come in contact with 
 it. There is likewise no use of water for manufacturing purposes, so 
 that in distribution only agricultural uses are considered. 
 
 "T\w technical term applied t<« the fine powdered rock, mostly in suspension, 
 coming from the Btamp mills and closely resembling that carried by glacial streams. 
 
scale; or miles 
 
 [HJLANDS UNDER RIST a GOSS DITCH 
 
 :-:-;]lanos under big Thompson a meg co ditch 
 
 gj^j LANDS UNDER BIG THOMPSON IRRIG a MrG.OlTCH 
 ==J LANDS UNOER EARMERS IRRIGATING CANAL 
 | LANDS UNDER HOME SUPPLY CANAL 
 
 |laNDSUNDER HILLSBOROUGH CANAL 
 
 ~|lANOSUNDERBIG THOMPSON NO.I DITCH 
 LANDS UNDER HILLa BRUSH ( 
 LANOS UNDER BIG THOMPSON 5 PLATTE RIVDITW 
 
 Map of Big Thompson Valley. 
 
11 
 
 The district is, moreover, practically independent of others in its 
 claims to water. There is no district above, but below the Big 
 Thompson empties into the Platte River and is subject to the priorities 
 on that stream. However, it is found in practice that tin 1 priorities 
 on the Bio- Thompson arc, generally speaking, older than those on the 
 Platte At such times as there might be a conflict there is an abun- 
 dance of water. Above the Big Thompson the St. Vrain discharges 
 into the Platte River a reliable How late in the season, and this, 
 together with a considerable inflow of seepage water, supplies :ill the 
 old priorities on the Platte below Platteville. The return seepage 
 water in the Big Thompson furnishes all the very old priorities on 
 that stream at its lower end and sends some water into the Platte. 
 
 The last, but one of the most important, of the reasons for selecting 
 this stream is that it presents clearly the extreme to which litigation 
 over rights to water may be carried. 
 
 PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS. 
 
 Water district No. 4, or the Thompson district, lies in the South 
 Platte division, or division No. 1, and wholly within the State of Col- 
 orado. It embraces portions of Boulder, Larimer, and Weld counties, 
 extending from the continental divide, on the west, eastward to the 
 South Platte River, with elevations varying from 5,000 to 1-1,000 feet, 
 the entire western boundary being above timber line, which in this 
 latitude is about 11,000 feet. The mountains, especially the northern 
 slopes, are a region'blessed with perpetual snow, from which the late 
 water is almost entirely derived. Below timber line the slopes of the 
 mountains are fairly well covered with timber. Fire has not yet 
 caused its entire destruction, and over the burned areas a new growth 
 is spreading rapidly, aiding in the conservation of the water supply by 
 retarding the melting of the snow. 
 
 The district may properly be divided into three divisions. The first 
 of these is the mountain region, where both the Little and Big 
 Thompson rivers flow in places through deep ravines and in others 
 traverse open parks of greater or less area. In these parks a few 
 ditches have been taken out for the purpose of irrigating hay meadows. 
 Never far away from the streams, flowing over porous, shallow soil 
 underlaid by solid rock, most of the water soon finds its way back to 
 the river. As these ditches are small and are not included in the 
 adjudication of rights by the court, they are not considered in the dis- 
 tribution of the water of the district, nor will they be considered in this 
 discussion. 
 
 The second division includes the lands irrigated by the waters of the 
 Little Thompson. The Little and Big Thompson rivers unite at a 
 point so near the entrance of the Big Thompson to the Platte that the 
 distribution of the water of each is practically independent of the other. 
 
12 
 
 The third division comprises all the land watered by the Bio- Thomp- 
 son between the point where it Issues from the mountains and its junc- 
 tion with the South Platte River. 
 
 In order to confine this discussion within the narrowest possible 
 limits, except in so far as the other divisions may affect the third, that 
 division, by far the most important and the most interesting, alone 
 will he considered. 
 
 To one standing on the outer range of foothills near the mouth of 
 the canyon and looking east, the entire valley of the Big Thompson is 
 visible. To the north, extending eastward, is the ridge between the 
 (ache la Poudrc and Big Thompson rivers, some 10 miles away at the 
 westerly end. and gradually approaching the river on its eastern trend. 
 The ground sloping gently to the river appears somewhat rolling. 
 To the south a similar ridge marks the boundary between the Little 
 and Big Thompson rivers. Less rolling, the country here presents a 
 smooth, even slope to the river. 
 
 The elevation and the fall of the river are such that the higher 
 ditches skirting the foothills soon reach the crests of those ridges and 
 extend down them to the limit of their supply of water for the lower- 
 lying land, but supplying water to lands on both the Cache la Poudre 
 and Little Thompson slopes. 
 
 WATEE SUPPLY. 
 
 Under this head will be found the data collected for a number of 
 years on the subject of precipitation and run-off. - 
 
 The gauging station on the Big Thompson River was established in 
 1883 by the late E. S. Nettleton. then State engineer of Colorado, and 
 was located "about 200 yards above the head of the upper ditch. 12 
 miles from Loveland." This station being found unsatisfactory, was 
 abandoned, and in 1887 another was established about 10 miles west of 
 Loveland and was maintained until 1892. In 1893 and 1891 no read- 
 ings were taken on the river. On May 9. 1895, a third station was 
 established some 9 miles west of Loveland. Being below both the 
 Handy and Home Supply ditches, a record of both of these, entailing 
 considerable extra labor, was necessary. On this account the station 
 was moved to a point above the head of the Home Supply Ditch April 
 1, 1899. This station, located about 3 miles south of the post-office at 
 Arkins, at a point where the wagon bridge crosses the stream, though 
 below the Handy Ditch, is quite satisfactory. The gauge rod is a verti- 
 cal 2-by-4 fastened on the downstream side of the south abutment of 
 the bridge. 
 
 The channel, though quite rough and full of bowlders, is permanent, 
 and the results obtained are reliable. The entire record for the river 
 at the several stations is given in the accompanying table: 
 
13 
 
 ComparaHiM t<ti>/, of discharge oj Big Thompson River at Arkin I 
 
 Month. 
 
 1888. 
 
 1888. 
 
 L890. 
 
 1891. 
 
 1892. 
 
 L896. 
 Cu.fi 
 
 1898. 
 
 1897. 
 Ou.fi 
 
 L89G 
 
 1899. 
 
 Cu.fi 
 
 381 
 140 
 
 l 
 
 on 
 808 
 L46 
 
 1 . 686 
 917 
 151 
 
 1,189 
 653 
 
 416 
 
 589 
 283 
 
 lie 
 
 146 
 92 
 35 
 
 a 116 
 
 64 
 
 L900. 
 
 April: 
 
 Cu.fi. 
 
 in >.«<■. 
 in> 
 62 
 
 10 
 
 260 
 
 132 
 50 
 
 760 
 158 
 200 
 
 no 
 
 275 
 
 160 
 
 580 
 190 
 100 
 
 180 
 75 
 60 
 
 100 
 46 
 40 
 
 Cu.fi. 
 t » raec. 
 
 Cu.fi. 
 i>< raec 
 
 Cu.fi 
 
 Cu.fi. 
 
 \,i r ■-' <■■ 
 
 Cu.fi. 
 
 i» rsec 
 74 
 87 
 
 .". 
 
 911 
 218 
 
 5 
 
 183 
 285 
 180 
 
 403 
 225 
 152 
 
 143 
 
 111 
 38 
 
 195 
 119 
 74 
 
 138 
 66 
 20 
 
 Cu.fi 
 
 Cu.fi 
 
 I" t 
 
 M C. 
 1,990 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 112 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 May: 
 
 546 707 
 359 136 
 ISO 
 
 L, 182 
 817 
 523 
 
 63d 
 883 
 219 
 
 235 
 159 
 
 105 
 
 137 
 
 95 
 
 69 
 
 182 
 312 
 195 
 
 L,195 
 
 Till 
 329 
 
 864 
 198 
 
 259 
 
 247 
 150 
 81 
 
 90 
 49 
 39 
 
 120 
 318 
 
 217 
 
 323 
 570 
 344 
 
 77s 
 165 
 293 
 
 6% 
 319 
 174 
 
 217 
 146 
 32 
 
 132 
 79 
 20 
 
 120 
 64 
 
 165 
 
 36 
 
 [59 
 267 
 
 iif, 
 
 390 
 133 
 36 
 
 85 
 37 
 15 
 
 is 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 841 
 
 164 
 
 L3 
 
 606 
 
 :;77 
 
 517 
 
 288 
 
 36 
 
 177 
 79 
 45 
 
 98 
 
 36 
 
 8 
 
 ■Jl 
 13 
 
 4 
 
 24 
 8 
 4 
 
 2,090 
 
 
 l 382 
 
 
 896 
 
 June: 
 
 527 
 382 
 208 
 
 370 
 200 
 10* 
 
 137 
 
 89 
 53 
 
 59 
 
 49 
 40 
 
 50 
 
 712 
 530 
 365 
 
 1,603 
 l.M 
 255 
 
 643 
 
 393 
 185 
 
 235 
 151 
 
 65 
 
 97 
 
 l.'.P.NI 
 
 Mean 
 
 1,362 
 
 7:;7 
 
 July: 
 
 566 
 
 
 349 
 
 
 208 
 
 August: 
 
 208 
 
 
 137 
 
 
 88 
 
 September: 
 
 38 
 
 
 77 
 
 
 60 
 
 October: 
 
 
 
 (6 67 
 28 51 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 38 
 
 November: 
 
 
 100 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 S3 
 60 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a No record October 1 to 7. 
 
 On account of the uncertainty of the location of the earlier stations 
 and because it is not known whether the waters diverted by the ditches 
 above the stations were included in the discharges as given, the records 
 for the years 1888 to 1892, inclusive, have been excluded in making 
 estimates of the discharge and run -off. In the table which follows the 
 volume diverted by the ditches is added to the discharge as given in 
 the preceding table, and the average computed for the six years 1895 
 to 1900, inclusive. 
 
 Run-off df Big Thompson drainogi area. 
 
 Monti). 
 
 1895. 
 
 1896. ! 1897. 1898. 
 
 1899. 1900. Average. 
 
 Average 
 monthly 
 precipita- 
 tion.fi 
 
 .lamia rv 
 
 Cubic feet 
 pt r st c. 
 
 ft 60 
 
 Cubic feet Cubic feel Cubic feet 
 i» r sec. i" r sec. ji> r sec 
 
 'Mill /Mil) ft CO 
 
 Cubic feet Cubic feet Cubic feet 
 per sec per sec per sec 
 
 ft 60 ft 60 60 
 ft 60 '' Ci) 60 
 blOO ft 100 100 
 
 Inches. 
 
 0.71 
 
 February . . 
 
 6 60 
 
 'Mill ftfiO ft CI) 
 
 l r.) 
 
 March 
 
 ft 100 ft 100 '> 100 ft 100 
 
 ft 250 37 &250 &25Q 
 
 440 269 590 I 231 
 
 931 363 679 198 
 
 687 2fil 379 317 
 
 1 75 
 
 April 
 
 302 41" 250 2.19 
 
 May 
 
 353 1.382 544 2.60 
 
 Julie 
 
 1,037 1,497 834 1.18 
 
 770 379 4C"» 2.27 
 
 July 
 
 August 
 
 re 
 
 173 196 
 
 112 
 57 
 
 28 
 17 
 
 ft60 
 
 316 159 230 1.74 
 
 September 
 
 185 
 116 
 
 ft 70 
 ft 60 
 
 161 
 
 71 
 
 103 ' ^7 111 i or 
 
 October 
 
 97 
 
 ft 70 
 ft60 
 
 54 
 
 27 
 *>60 
 
 64 ''71 71 
 
 1.11 
 
 November 
 
 ft 70 ft 70 .54 
 ft 60 ft 60 60 
 
 69 
 
 December 
 
 68 
 
 
 
 Average 
 
 282 
 
 143 
 
 211 
 
 149 
 
 275 361 237 17.48 
 
 "Melted snow and rain. 
 
 ''Estimated. 
 
14 
 
 ( bniparatuh BtaU rm ni of run-off and /</•- ajntatfan. 
 
 year. 
 
 Precipi- 
 tation. 
 
 Precipi- 
 tation. -i 
 
 Run-off. 
 
 Runoff. 
 
 
 Inches. 
 22. 87 
 L7.28 
 
 lv-7 
 16.86 
 16.58 
 16.72 
 
 Inches. 
 24.10 
 
 17.07 
 17.02 
 16.99 
 18.25 
 16.42 
 
 Inches. 
 12.6 
 
 6.3 
 9.3 
 6.6 
 12.1 
 16.0 
 
 Per cent. 
 52 
 
 
 
 1 896 
 
 37 
 
 1897 
 
 55 
 
 1 S'lx 
 
 39 
 
 
 
 66 
 
 L900 
 
 97 
 
 
 
 a Year ending October 31. 
 
 It was found necessary to estimate the discharges for the months 
 when no record was kept. These, being the months of least How. were 
 easily determined. At the same time any error in the estimate affects 
 the general result but little. In arriving at the conclusions given the 
 discharges of other rivers in the State which had records covering the 
 entire year were examined. As a result of such examination the gen- 
 eral proposition may be stated that streams reach their minimum 
 before the 1st of November, increasing thereafter slightly to Decem- 
 ber, and thereafter the discharge is quite constant until the warm 
 days in spring increase the now. 
 
 The following tables of precipitation are furnished by the United 
 State- Weather Bureau and are for the three stations of the district. 
 The Longs Peak and Moraine stations are located well back in the 
 mountains, the Moraine station having an elevation of 7.000 feet above 
 sea level. This station, located on one of the branches which consti- 
 tute the headwaters of the Big Thompson, is about 6 miles from the 
 summit of the range, and, being so situated, gives a much better general 
 average of rainfall on the watershed of the Big Thompson than either 
 the Longs Peak station or the Waterdale station. Besides this, the 
 observations cover nearly twice as many years. For these reasons, in 
 estimating the run-off relative to the precipitation, the averages in this 
 table have been used. The Waterdale station is located near Arkins, 
 just inside the first range of low foothills, and these records are of 
 most use in cases where the precipitation on the cultivated land is 
 wanted. 
 
 Precipitation for L<>n<js Peak station, Larimer County, Colo. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Jan. Feb. 
 
 Mar. 
 
 Apr. May. 
 
 June. 
 
 July. 
 
 Aug. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Oct. 
 
 Nov. j Dec. 
 
 Total. 
 
 1 B96.... 
 
 Inches. Inches. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 2.70 
 .65 
 1.50 
 2.06 
 1.09 
 .80 
 
 4.61 
 3.60 
 1.86 
 
 2.94 
 
 4. 32 
 
 .51 
 
 Inches. 
 1.52 
 2.95 
 1.29 
 1.53 
 1.73 
 .17 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1.10 
 
 1.95 
 
 .95 
 
 .81 
 
 .11 
 
 1.93 
 
 In < ■!,>.<. 
 2.60 
 1.05 
 1.41 
 .60 
 2.50 
 1.14 
 
 Inches. 
 
 0.50 
 
 .37 
 
 1.07 
 
 1.60 
 
 .02 
 
 .44 
 
 Inches. 
 
 0.17 
 .15 
 .55 
 .60 
 .64 
 .64 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1897.... 
 
 1899.... 
 1900.... 
 
 6.65 
 .78 1.25 
 .24 
 .54 1.16 
 
 . 16 . B6 
 
 3.17 
 1.96 
 
 3.01 
 .35 
 
 1.00 
 1.45 
 
 1.73 
 1.18 
 6.34 
 
 1.21 
 
 1.60 
 
 ■2.07 
 
 .38 
 
 .60 
 
 16.91 
 15.66 
 15.76 
 16.67 
 13.93 
 
 Mean 
 
 .40 . <»3 L85 2.54 1.17 
 
 1.47 2.97 i 1.53 
 
 1.14 1.55 
 
 .67 
 
 .46 16.48 
 
15 
 
 PrecipUatitm ai dfora&ne station, Larimer County, Colo. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Jan. 
 
 Feb. 
 
 Mar. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 Ma\ . 
 
 June. 
 
 July. 
 
 Mil-. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 on. 
 
 N<-v. 
 
 Dec. 
 
 Total. 
 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Tnchea, 
 
 I mius. 
 
 Indus. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1 nrhis. 
 
 I miiis. 
 
 I mins. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 I mius. 
 
 I miu s. 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1889... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 . :,7 
 
 1.84 
 
 ii. Hi 
 
 .65 
 
 . Mil 
 .:;:. 
 
 
 1890.... 
 
 0. 81 
 
 0. 76 
 
 0.71 
 
 •2.77 
 
 1.30 
 
 l.o:, 
 
 2. I-' 
 
 :;. lo 
 
 0.82 
 
 
 L891.... 
 
 2. 88 
 
 8.00 
 
 :;. 52 
 
 L.80 
 
 :;. 26 
 
 1.10 
 
 1.12 
 
 . '.to 
 
 l. 16 
 
 .81 
 
 .01 
 
 . 02 
 
 20.70 
 
 1892.... 
 
 .50 
 
 1.80 
 
 1.84 
 
 1 . 69 
 
 8.23 
 
 .si 
 
 2.17 
 
 .(12 
 
 .0(1 
 
 
 .110 
 
 .60 
 
 18. I- 
 
 1898-... 
 
 .69 
 
 2. 32 
 
 1.88 
 
 l.:;i 
 
 L.76 
 
 .:?7 
 
 1. i:; 
 
 1.88 
 
 .21 
 
 . i:; 
 
 l.o:; 
 
 .00 
 
 1 1. 10 
 
 L894.... 
 
 .40 
 
 . 99 
 
 L.08 
 
 1 . Mi 
 
 .">. 72 
 
 .88 
 
 2.2^ 
 
 1.26 
 
 2.1:; 
 
 . 66 
 
 .:.( 
 
 l . 58 
 
 L8.75 
 
 L896.... 
 
 . 12 
 
 L.60 
 
 l. in 
 
 1.71 
 
 1.63 
 
 2.53 
 
 :}. 66 
 
 2. 86 
 
 .84 
 
 2.80 
 
 .86 
 
 .in 
 
 22. :;7 
 
 L896.... 
 
 .68 
 
 • >•) 
 
 •_'. 87 
 
 L.08 
 
 1.(12 
 
 . 10 
 
 3.88 
 
 2.50 
 
 •2.71 
 
 .7.', 
 
 .80 
 
 .:*o 
 
 17. 28 
 
 1897.... 
 
 .61 
 
 1 . 68 
 
 L.86 
 
 1.29 
 
 2.30 
 
 1.79 
 
 2.52 
 
 2. 48 
 
 .78 
 
 1.1.1 
 
 1 . 2:. 
 
 1.20 
 
 18.87 
 
 1898 
 
 .50 
 
 l.o:. 
 
 1 . 32 
 
 1. 11 
 
 3.05 
 
 1.98 
 
 2.19 
 
 1 . (17 
 
 .40 
 
 . 00 
 
 1.77 
 
 . 55 
 
 L6.86 
 
 L899.... 
 
 .77 
 
 2. 82 
 
 2. 98 
 
 1 . 89 
 
 .45 
 
 1.57 
 
 3.02 
 
 1 . 82 
 
 .15 
 
 1.00 
 
 .00 
 
 . 65 
 
 L6.68 
 
 1900.... 
 
 .'21 
 
 1.11 
 
 .30 
 
 7.71 
 
 1.30 
 
 .91 
 
 . 86 
 
 . 28 
 
 2. 19 
 
 1 . 12 
 
 . 17 
 
 . Is 
 
 K1.72 
 
 Mean 
 
 .71 
 
 1.67 
 
 1.75 
 
 2. 19 
 
 2. GO 
 
 1.18 
 
 2. 27 
 
 1.74 
 
 1.07 
 
 1.11 
 
 .69 
 
 .08 
 
 17.48 
 
 Precipitation at Waterdale station, near Arkins, Colo. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Jan. 
 
 Feb. 
 
 Mar. 
 
 Apr. 
 
 May. 
 
 Juno. 
 
 July 
 
 Aug. 
 
 Sept. 
 
 Oct. 
 
 Nov. 
 
 Dee. 
 
 Total. 
 
 1900.... 
 Mean 
 
 [mius. 
 0.21 
 . (12 
 .18 
 .21 
 .63 
 .19 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1.33 
 .28 
 .50 
 .25 
 
 1.10 
 
 Inches. 
 
 o. o,s 
 1.50 
 2.32 
 
 .87 
 1.25 
 
 .97 
 
 I mius, 
 1.89 
 1.22 
 1.82 
 
 1. 12 
 
 .SI 
 
 9.21 
 
 Inches, 
 
 4.95 
 1.66 
 3.61 
 3.43 
 .67 
 1.76 
 
 Indus. 
 4.60 
 1.83 
 2.30 
 1.86 
 .92 
 .45 
 
 Inches. 
 5.84 
 2.58 
 2.42 
 1.20 
 2.12 
 1.05 
 
 Indies. 
 0. 57 
 1.44 
 1.09 
 1.61 
 .94 
 .57 
 
 Inches. 
 
 0.51 
 
 2.60 
 
 .84 
 
 .51 
 
 .19 
 
 1.72 
 
 Indus. 
 1. 15 
 
 Inches. 
 
 Indus, 
 
 Inches. 
 
 1.07 
 .75 
 
 3.30 
 .18 
 
 0.08 
 .82 
 
 1.62 
 .00 
 .12 
 
 0.43 
 .64 
 
 .:.o 
 .49 
 .22 
 
 ,84 
 
 72 
 
 1.32 
 
 2.73 
 
 2.54 
 
 1.04 
 
 1.06 
 
 1.19 
 
 ,53 
 
 14. 92 
 17.61 
 11.2(1 
 12. 45 
 17.30 
 
 16.60 
 
 A comparison of the averages of the three tables shows that the 
 rainfall is very evenly distributed, there being little difference between 
 that of places at an elevation of 6,000 feet and of those at 9,000 feet. 
 Nor does there appear in the tables anything to indicate that the pre- 
 cipitation is differently distributed over the year, all three showing 
 the least precipitation in winter and the most in the spring and sum- 
 mer. The records cover a period scarcely long enough to make com- 
 parisons or to reach conclusions. An attempt was made to ascertain 
 what relation the precipitation during the winter had to the late flow of 
 the river, but no conclusion was reached while considering chiefly the 
 snowfall at the high altitudes. In this study the year was divided not 
 at January 1, but at November 1, assuming that the snow falling after 
 November 1 would remain until spring at least. This failure to reach 
 a conclusion is not surprising, for the late flow is dependent as much 
 upon the amount of drifting as upon the quantity of snowfall, it being 
 only deep drifts that remain late. The temperature in spring is a 
 factor, as is also the rainfall at that time. Warm spring rains melt 
 the great drifts on the northern slopes and in the sheltered places 
 rapidly. The rain, augmented by the melted snow, flows away almost 
 immediately, while snow melted b}^ the sun late in the day refreezes 
 to a considerable extent the succeeding night. The slower melting of 
 the snow also allows the water to enter the soil and the cracks and 
 crevices of the rocks, to reappear later in the season in springs which 
 
16 
 
 feed the river. This applies t<> the untimbered portions and those 
 above timber line where the winds and rains have free access to the 
 
 snow, and has especial reference to Longs Peak station. Under these 
 modifying conditions, of which there are no records and which inject 
 so many variables into the calculation, and with so few years of com- 
 plete records to consider, even though conclusions were reached, they 
 would not he positive in their character. Necessarily a good snowfall 
 during the early winter on the higher elevations melts later than that 
 lower down when unprotected under similar conditions of rain and 
 sun during the melting period. If the winds aid in building deep 
 drifts in the ravines, or if there are no warm rains, the beneficial 
 result of an early snow is quite marked. The records given here, 
 however, seem to indicate that the run-off from protected snows can 
 be more easily predicted in advance and are less affected by the con- 
 ditions of rain. sun. and wind during the melting period. 
 
 The run-off and average rainfall, as given above, seem to hear a 
 relation to each other. Both being- considered for the year, one would 
 expect little difference in their relative proportions. By the table, 
 the year L895 had 22.37 inches precipitation and an average run-off of 
 282 cubic feet per second. The following year a decrease in rainfall 
 brought a decrease in the run-off of 139 cubic feet per second, nearly 
 50 per cent. In 1897 there was an increase in both items, in 1898 a 
 decrease in both, while for 1899 the run-off was nearly twice as much 
 as in 1898, and in 1900 nearly three times as much as in 1898, with 
 scarcely any difference in precipitation for the three years. The run- 
 off for the year 1900 exceeded, indeed, that for 1895, with its record- 
 breaking rainfall of 2^.87 inches. The difference of time of year of 
 the rainfall and the run-off for these years of extremes will now 
 be examined. In 1895 it is seen that the run-off had a maximum 
 recorded discharge of 931 cubic feet per second and a minimum of 
 116 cubic feet per second; that for August, September, and October, 
 months of small discharge, the flow exceeded that of any other year 
 for the corresponding months. For May. June, and July, however, 
 the average run-off for 1895 is exceeded a number of times in years 
 greatly less in total precipitation, as, for example, May. 1897, June 
 and July. 1899, and May and June. 1900. The year 1900 is especially 
 remarkable, May and June Bhowing the highest run-off for any months 
 of which there is record, while for the months of small now the dis- 
 charge is considerably below the normal. Turning now to the record 
 of precipitation, it will be seen that at the Moraine station it was 
 remarkably well distributed throughout the different months of L895, 
 with a maximum for May of 4.t>3 inches, about one-fifth of the total. 
 In 1900, however, the distribution was very poor. 7.74 inches falling 
 in the month of April alone, almost one-half of the rainfall for the 
 entire year. Although the total run-off for 1900 was far in excess of 
 
 
17 
 
 that for L895, much of the water escaped and was not available for irri- 
 gation. Neither the reservoir nor the feeder-ditch capacity was suffi- 
 cient to store more than a fraction of the Mow for May and June, nor 
 would it he economy to increase them to an extent sufficient to store 
 such floods, occurring as they do at rare intervals; in fact, only once 
 in twelve years is such a Hood recorded. Therefore a uniformly dis- 
 tributed rainfall, as in L895, even though it give a much smaller 
 percentage of run-off as compared with precipitation, is better than 
 that of a year like L900, when most of it occurs in a short period. 
 
 The variations in the percentages of run-off and its causes will now 
 be considered. The run-off for L895 was 52 per cent, while that of 
 L900 was !>7 per cent of the precipitation. The great loss of 1895 was 
 caused by the long exposure to the dry winds, a large amount of even 
 the early winter snows passing directly from the solid to the vaporous 
 state. The remarkable run-oil' of L900 is due principally to the rapidity 
 with which the water reached the stream and to the short exposure. 
 Two other causes, which might be classed as errors in the data used, 
 contributed to swell the percentage of run-off: First, the precipitation 
 on the lower reaches of the river, as shown by the Arkins station rec- 
 ords, was greater than that shown by Moraine station records; second, 
 almost no old snow remained after the summer of 1900. Snow banks 
 which had been considered wi perpetual" had by the action of the rains 
 been almost entirely melted. This snow, deposited in previous years, 
 of course does not appear in the records of precipitation for the year 
 1900. Considering the long exposure of 1895, the percentage of loss 
 by evaporation is not remarkable. In the year 1899 there was a large 
 precipitation in the early spring, probably in the form of light snow, 
 which, melting rapidly as the weather warmed, caused high water in 
 the early summer. The bountiful snowfall of the preceding Novem- 
 ber and December furnished a good late flow. 
 
 The record of Longs Peak station failed to establish a relation 
 between a late flow and the snowfall in the early winter; but here we 
 have, when considering the precipitation for lower altitudes, appar- 
 ently positive proof that early winter snows do augment the flow. 
 What, then, is the reason for the apparent slower run-off at the lower 
 altitudes \ As already mentioned, the timber near the headwaters is 
 still well preserved and new timber is coming up where fire passed 
 some years ago. In these low r er altitudes the soil is deeper, the many 
 small depressions form lakes and marshes, and numerous small grassy 
 parks are found; all these aid in retarding the escape of the water. A 
 good fall of snow in the spring will lie in the timber for a long time; 
 such as falls on the little open parks is absorbed by the ground as it 
 melts; the melting in the timber is slow" and almost all the water sinks 
 into the ground, and, while the snow itself may disappear early, con- 
 2817— No. 118—02 2 
 
18 
 
 siderable time is consumed by the water in percolating through the 
 soil before it appears again in the springs and water courses lower 
 down. 
 
 The forests, especially, aid in holding back the water, for they pro- 
 tect both the unmeited snow and the wet ground or surface water from 
 the dry winds and sun, and the loose, porous soil of the forests will 
 absorb water almost as fast as the snow is melted. In the higher 
 un forested areas, the ground being much steeper and with less cover- 
 ing to absorb the melted snow, the run-off is much more rapid. 
 
 From the above the following statements are formulated: 
 
 (1) Snows in the early winter in high altitude will furnish a late 
 flow, but the amount of late flow therefrom is modified at first by 
 the drifting and then by weather conditions as regards rains and 
 cloudiness. 
 
 (2) Snows in the forested areas give a better distribution of run-off 
 than in unforested areas. 
 
 (3) Years of well-distributed precipitation give a more even and 
 later flow in the rivers than years of excessive periodical rains; but 
 years of evenly distributed rainfall give a less total of run-off. 
 
 The average run-off for six years was 237 cubic feet per second for 
 the entire year. This means a total of 470 acre-feet per da}', or 171,550 
 acre-feet per year. 
 
 The drainage area of the Big Thompson above the gauging station is 
 given as 305 square miles, or 195.200 acres. The run-off in depth over 
 the entire surface is therefore 0.88 foot, or 10.56 inches, as compared 
 with 17.18 inches precipitation. This indicates that about 57 per cent 
 of the total precipitation would be available for irrigation if it could 
 all be stored or should come at such time and in such volume as could 
 be used for direct irrigation. This subject will be treated in the dis- 
 cussion of duty of water and reservoirs. 
 
 DITCHES. 
 
 In the valley of the Big Thompson prior to 1861 there was very 
 little settlement, the gold excitement being much farther south, the 
 point farthest north where any mining was done being on Boulder 
 Creek. 
 
 It w T as the mines that furnished, in the earliest days as they do now, 
 the best and most profitable market; and then, as now, the farms made 
 possible the development of most of the mining resources. 
 
 The irrigation of the meadow lands required a great deal of water, 
 or. if they did not really require it. it took a great deal to injure them. 
 Underlaid, as they usually were, with a bed of coarse gravel, bowlders, 
 and wash, they drained quickly, and little alkali was brought to the 
 surface, that undesirable substance coming later from the upper lands. 
 The higher grounds were leached by the excessive application of water; 
 
19 
 
 the resultant seepage, strongly impregnated, appeared later in the 
 lower lands, and, evaporating, left on the surface a coating of white 
 
 alkali. 
 
 In the construction of the earlier ditches n<> attempt was made to 
 reach a level higher than the bottom lands. 'The early settler was 
 skeptical as to the ability of the upper lands to produce anything other 
 than short grass and cactus, and the running of ditches out onto the 
 mesas was too great an undertaking. The ditches began only high 
 enough up on the stream to cover the land of the builders, and were 
 given a grade more with reference to making the water run than to 
 maintaining a maximum elevation. The matter of erosion of the ditch 
 was never considered. The ditch was carried over the edge of the first 
 mesa and thence along its foot on no uniform or fixed grade. Often 
 the rate of fall was greater than that of the river itself, which in 
 its meanderings back and forth traversed much Longer distances than 
 the ditch between the same points. The consequence was that the 
 ditches washed and grew larger and larger. An extension required no 
 enlargement of the old portion, and the abundance of water and the 
 ease with which a large amount was obtained led to excessive use. If 
 the decrees were based on the sizes of the ditches it is not surprising 
 that they were excessive. 
 
 There were probably earlier, small, unimportant, and now forgot- 
 ten ditches, but at present there are only 15 in all. Of these, 2 
 are practically abandoned and 2 are small and supplied by seepage, 
 while 1 other has no decree and is likewise supplied by seepage. 
 Those ditches which survived up to the granting of decrees in 1881 
 are described below, and, as far as possible, their original names, loca- 
 tions, sizes, and the land covered at the various periods are given. 
 It is a delicate matter to make statements concerning these ditches, in 
 view of the lawsuits past and anticipated. When voluminous court 
 records give directly conflicting evidence by the "oldest inhabitants," 
 one will surely be excused for so often using the words "possible," 
 "probable," "perhaps," and "about." 
 
 The statement of the former and present value of lands under sev- 
 eral ditches is given for three reasons: 
 
 (1) To compare them with unirrigated Government and railroad 
 lands. 
 
 (2) To show the change of sentiment toward bottom lands and those 
 on tin 1 mesa. In the early days bottom lands only were of much value. 
 yet a few years ago they were the lowest priced of any in the district. 
 The reclamation of this land by drainage will make it very valuable 
 for the planting of onions in particular and of sugar beets, as it is 
 very rich though hard to thoroughly subdue. It is quite rough and 
 requires leveling to make it available for these crops. 
 
20 
 
 (3) These hinds arc certain to again be of great value, and it is for 
 future comparison also that the data is given here. 
 
 THE BIG THOMPSON DITCH. 
 
 A description and a history of the construction and management of 
 this the first ditch upon the Big Thompson of which there is any 
 record or which is of importance at the present time, is similar to that 
 of all the early ditches in the district, and much of what is said will 
 apply as well to other districts throughout the State. According to 
 the record the survey and construction were begun November 10, 1861, 
 the ditch being a neighborhood enterprise intended to water the lands 
 of a number of adjoining farms. 
 
 Without irrigation the grasses of the meadow lands were generally 
 forced to maturity by the hot weather and the want of moisture before 
 the growing season was really over, and the product was light, although 
 making an excellent feed. The experiment having been tried in 
 other communities with good results, it was believed that the applica- 
 tion of water would very materially lengthen the growing season and 
 produce a much greater tonnage. So we see that ditch building was 
 almost coincident with settlement. 
 
 The Big Thompson Ditch was some 8 miles long, covering a narrow 
 strip of land, seldom more than a mile in width along the river bottom, 
 and amounting probably to less than 3,000 acres, being almost entirely 
 ha}^ land of the second bottom. The decree gives the ditch 90.5 cubic 
 feet of water per second, which purports to be the amount actually car- 
 ried at times by the ditch and necessary for the land watered. While 
 it is possible that the ditch had a capacity equal to the decree and 
 possibly did at times carry that amount, it is hardly credible that that 
 quantity was either necessaiy or carried for any considerable time. 
 
 In 1897 28 cubic feet of water per second was transferred by order 
 of the district court to the Hillsboro Ditch. This transfer served 
 two purposes: (1) A consolidation of interests with a consequent 
 decrease of expense in maintenance, and (2) it made possible the irri- 
 gation of higher and better land. Such a transfer could hardly be 
 objected to by outside parties, as the head gate of the Hillsboro 
 Ditch is but a mile above that of the Big Thompson, and any seepage 
 water previously used was still available, and if the full appropriation 
 had formerly been diverted to irrigate the bottom lands its use on the 
 more valuable upland, requiring less water, was certainly wise. In 
 1897 the superintendent of irrigation made transfers of individual 
 shares to the Hillsboro Ditch as follows: Two of 14, one of 7, and 
 two of 5 cubic feet per second each. In the same year two shares of 
 
 "The prices given were obtained in 1901 and have already very materially 
 changed. 
 
 
21 
 5 cubic feel per second each were transferred in similar manner to the 
 
 Home Supply Ditch. Permission was also given to transfer one of 7 
 cubic feet per second to the Loudon Ditch. This transfer, however, is 
 
 uncertain, as the interests of the Loudon Ditch appear to demand a 
 prohibition of transfers of all kinds, and it is probable that this com- 
 pany will resist the other transfers permitted by the superintendent 
 of irrigation. There now remains in the Hie; Thompson Ditch 5i 
 cubic feet of water per second, irrigating some 500 acres, with a pos- 
 sibility of the return of 62 cubic feet of water per second temporarily 
 transferred to other canals. This ditch in its present condition can 
 not cany to exceed 25 cubic feet per second. It in all probability had 
 been in that condition for a considerable time prior to the transfers of 
 water. From data at hand the ditch carried but 22 cubic feet per 
 second in 1890 and covered but 640 acres of land. The value of land 
 under this ditch in the early days was from $10 to $60 per acre; its 
 value now, however, is about $20 per acre. The decrease is easily 
 accounted for in the decline in the price of wild hay from $50 or $100 
 to less than $10 per ton, together with the fact that much of the land 
 has become water- logged. 
 
 MARIANO DITCH. 
 
 The ditch, designated as priority No. 3, was built in 1862 by a Mexi- 
 can by the name of Mariano and his people, to irrigate lands on the 
 south side of the river. The ditch was small, and Mariano, unable to 
 cope with American energy in the acquirement and perfection of 
 water rights and the holding of land, at length found himself confined 
 to some 10 acres. The ditch was gradually abandoned and is now a 
 record only. This was the first private ditch in the district. At the 
 time of the decree its owners claimed for it a capacity- of 38.4 cubic 
 feet per second; however, as they testified that it irrigated but 120 
 acres, and although the referee stated that there was insufficient data 
 for granting a decree, the court granted 3.12 cubic feet per second, or 
 an inch (0.026 cubic foot per second) to the acre. 
 
 THE BIG THOMPSON AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY'S DITCH. 
 
 This ditch is located on the south side of the Big Thompson, about 
 2 miles west of Loveland. It is less than 7 miles in length, covers 
 about 1,300 acres on the river bottom, and was the first ditch in the 
 district to incorporate. Its first decree of 34.02 cubic feet per second 
 is dated April 1, 1863. The ditch was enlarged and extended in 1861, 
 acquiring its second right of 37.01 cubic feet per second May 1, 1861. 
 In 1S67 the head gate was moved farther up the river and the ditch built 
 to cover land farther back from the river. Being much larger than the 
 
22 
 
 old ditch, it acquired its third right of 05.47 cubic foot per second. 
 In May, L872, it claimed a fourth appropriation of 9.75 cubic feet 
 per second, making a total of 146.25 cubic feet per second. From the 
 present size of the ditch, its locution, and the amount of land covered, 
 it docs not seem possible that more than 75 cubic feet per second was 
 ever carried, and at present it does not run to exceed 25 cubic feet per 
 second. Some ten years ago, by measurement, it had a maximum 
 capacity of not to exceed 50 cubic feet per second. In the application 
 of the claimants for a decree the maximum amount of land claimed to 
 have been Irrigated was but L, 500 acres, while the land susceptible of 
 irrigation was but 2,180 acres. According to the referee the capacity 
 of the ditch was 213 cubic feet per second, with a fall of 25 feet to the 
 mile considerable water for such a fall; the court, however, granted 
 but 146.25 cubic feet per second for the 2,180 acres, something over 
 2^ inches to the acre, or, for the 1,500 acres irrigated a duty of some- 
 thing like 1(> acres to the cubic foot per second. Under the same 
 ditch on the same land the duty at present is about 162 acres to the 
 cubic foot per second. 
 
 Attention is called here to the table under the heading "Titles to 
 water." page 64, which gives a summary of the findings of the court on 
 all the ditches. 
 
 Transfers have been made as follows: 
 
 To the Home Supply Company, by sale, 24 cubic feet per second; 
 by permission of the superintendent of irrigation. 22 cubic feet per 
 second for five individuals, the amounts being 10, 4, 3, 3, and 2 cubic 
 feet per second. 
 
 To the Handy Ditch, 6 cubic feet per second, by permission. 
 
 To the South Side Ditch, 6 cubic feet per second, by permission. 
 
 To the Farmers' Ditch, 1^ cubic feet per second, by order of the 
 court. 
 
 To the Loudon Ditch, 1 cubic foot per second, by permission. 
 
 Against this transfer, however, the Loudon company will protest. 
 If the estimate of 75 cubic feet per second maximum capacity is cor- 
 rect, and if the transfers stand, but 3.97 cubic feet per second remain 
 of tin 1 water used before the transfers for this ditch. In making the 
 sale to the Home Supply Ditch the part sold was not all of one 
 priority, a proportionate amount of each of the four appropriations. 
 approximately one-sixth of each, being sold. The value of this water 
 in the Home Supply Canal averages probably $1,000 per cubic foot 
 per second, while the price paid is said to have been $400 per cubic 
 foot per second. The land being much the same as under the Big 
 Thompson, has. as a whole, decreased in value; some of the land, 
 however, is excellent and worth probably $50 per acre. 
 
 There are no reservoirs' or reservoir sites under this ditch. 
 
28 
 
 THE FARMERS 1 IRRIGATING DITCH. 
 
 By successive enlargements this ditch has the following rights: 
 
 Decreed rights of Farmers* Irrigating l>it<-li. 
 
 Cable feel 
 per second. 
 
 May 1, 1864 5.72 
 
 June l. L868 :MH> 
 
 Angusl l, lsrs 54.08 
 
 Total 62. 40 
 
 It is located just south of Loveland on the north bank of the river; 
 it is about 9 miles in length and covers 4,500 acres of land worth $15 
 per acre. The area irrigated is probably nearly 3,000acres. It has 
 
 30 shares, of a value of £1.200 each: each share supposed to be suffi- 
 cient for 160 acres. This ditch carries 1^ cubic feet of water per sec- 
 ond, decreed to the Big Thompson and Manufacturing Company's Ditch 
 by order of the district court. Had the amount been larger the trans- 
 fer would probably have been resisted by other ditches injuriously 
 affected. 
 
 The annual expenses on the ditch average for superintendence $300 
 and for repairs $300. 
 
 The capacity at present is about equal to its decreed rights. 
 
 There are no reservoirs or reservoir sites under this ditch. Con- 
 sidering the amount of water allowed per acre cultivated for the Big 
 Thompson and Manufacturing Company's Ditch, the amount of water 
 decreed this ditch seems to be very small. Although this ditch was 
 actually irrigating one-third more land and had under it twice as much 
 land as the manufacturing company's ditch, its decree is less than 
 one-half as large. Though the character of the land under each is 
 similar, the court saw T no inconsistency in its decrees. 
 
 THE BIG THOMPSON IRRIGATING DITCH. 
 
 Having priority No. 5 in the district, this ditch is locally designated 
 as "No. 5 ditch." It is some 5 miles long and covers about 1.000 acres 
 of land along the river bottom. 
 
 Considerable controversy has arisen over the decrees of this ditch 
 and its capacity in connection with its sale to the Handy Ditch Com- 
 pany. 
 
 The head of the ditch was located some 2 miles southeast of Love- 
 land, and since 1895 has not been used. The decree is for 78 < ubic 
 feet per second, of date of February 25, 1865, which the Handy Ditch 
 Company purchased in 1897, together with the land covered by the 
 ditch. Upon application to the superintendent of irrigation in 1897 
 to transfer the full 78 cubic feet per second he allowed 4<» cubic feet 
 per second to be changed, provided the old ditch be abandoned. On 
 
•24 
 
 appeal to the State engineer thai official caused the line of the old ditch 
 
 to be carefully surveyed and its cross section determined. The result 
 
 of the survey showed that the ditch could carry more than 78 cubic 
 feel per second, even taking the Least cross section and Lightest grade 
 found as a basis of calculation. The State engineer, therefore, ordered 
 the entire decree to he transferred, which resulted in suit being 
 brought, under the the title of "The Loudon Irrigating (anal Co. /•. 
 the Handy Ditch Co. et al." This case i- given more fully later. At 
 present the Handy Ditch is allowed to draw not more than 20 cubic 
 feet per second of this water. In obtaining a decree the capacity as 
 claimed by the owners was hut 75 cubic feet per second, but notwith- 
 standing this the decree grants 7s feet per second, or 3 "inches" of 
 water per acre. The size of the ditch i- given as s feel on the bottom. 
 14 feet on top. 3 miles in length, 2i feet in depth, with a fall of L0 feet 
 to the mile. 
 
 THE LOVELAND AND GREELEY CANAL. 
 
 The eanal or, rather, system of canals and reservoirs which _ 
 under this name is one of the most important in the district, extend- 
 ing, as it does, from a point on the Big Thompson some 3 miles west of 
 Loveland nearly to the town of Greeley, supplying water along its 
 entire course to more than 21,000 acres, the greater part of which lies 
 near Greeley and on both the Big Thompson and Cache la Poudre 
 slopes. The name Loveland and Greeley was applied to the main 
 canal as it was enlarged. The head gate is located in sec. 17. T. 5 N., 
 R. 69 W., and the system embraces the old Larimer County Irrigating 
 and Manufacturing Ditch, commonly called the Chubbuck Ditch, with 
 its priorities as follows: 
 
 Decreed rights of Chubbuck Ditch. 
 
 Cubic feet 
 per second. 
 
 November 1, 1865 - 
 
 October 20, 1 870 30. 04 
 
 Octol)er 25, 1873 35. 50 
 
 Total 82. !»0 
 
 This total of S2.90 cubic feet per second, added to the decree of 
 April 1, 1881, of 297. 44. makes a total of 380.34 cubic feet per second. 
 With this latter enlargement (the extension of the canal by the Boom- 
 erang and Grapevine laterals) it covered some 30,000 acres. The old 
 Larimer County Irrigating and Manufacturing Ditch at the time of its 
 decree covered about 2.100 acres, of which 1,800 were irrigated. In 
 acquiring this ditch the Loveland and Greeley Irrigating and Land 
 Company guaranteed to the owners thereof a perpetual free and first 
 right to the water of the canal at such times as it was needed and in 
 amount to the full extent of their priorities. The company does not. 
 however, furnish reservoir water under this agreement. The amount 
 
25 
 
 of land so irrigated amounts t<» about 3,100 acres, and tin 1 amount of 
 free water furnished is L,815 inches under a 2-inch pressure. 
 The Barnes Ditch was another acquirement by the company under 
 
 similar agreement, the company furnishing free water to the extent 
 of 2. LOO statutory inches. The land watered, however, scarcely exceeds 
 1,000 acres. The Barnes Ditch had four priorities, as follows: 
 
 Decreed riglUs of Harms />i/,-h. 
 
 Cubic feet 
 per second. 
 
 October20, L865 18.56 
 
 June 1, L867 12.06 
 
 June23, is?:; 19.93 
 
 November 1, L878 15.20 
 
 T< >tal 05. 75 
 
 The ditch was acquired and enlarged as a feeder to Lake Loveland, 
 and when in good repair has a capacity of more than 400 cubic feet 
 per second. The total decreed right of the Loveland and Greeley 
 Canal is 446.09 cubic feet per second. 
 
 Four kinds of rights exist under this system — the old Larimer 
 County Irrigation and Manufacturing Ditch free rights, the old Barnes 
 Ditch free rights, the rights under the Loveland and Greeley Canal 
 proper, and the Lake Loveland Reservoir rights. A piece of land 
 may have a reservoir right with either of the others, or a reservoir 
 right alone. There are 208 rights of 80 acres each under the Love- 
 land and Greeley Canal proper, of which 205 are in use; under the 
 reservoir are 300 rights of 80 acres each, of which 175 are in use. 
 There is considerable land covered by no water right that lies under 
 the ditch and the reservoir whose outlet is the ditch, and it is probable 
 that some of this land is watered. A water right, being about 1.44 
 cubic feet per second, is made to cover much more than 80 acres, the 
 waste and seepage water being used. 
 
 The range of value of the land is considerable, but $75 per acre is 
 not uncommon even for 160-acre tracts, 'especially if it possesses 
 both ditch and reservoir rights. 
 
 THE BIG THOMPSON AND PLATTE RIVER DITCH. 
 
 This ditch is located at the extreme lower end of the district, just 
 above the mouth of the Little Thompson, from which it draws some 
 seepage water. It has two priorities, one dated November 18, 1865, 
 for 35 cubic feet per second, and one dated May 15, 1870, for 86.18 
 cubic feet per second. Its first priority is supplied principally from 
 seepage. The ditch covers about 1,800 acres between the Big Thomp- 
 son and the Platte River, and has a carrying capacity of about 40 cubic 
 feet per second. The cost of maintenance, including supervision, is 
 about $500 per year. This ditch is a source of very little trouble to 
 
26 
 
 the commissioner, he having to visit it seldom, as there is generally 
 enough seepage to supply its needs when water is scarce. 
 
 HIST AND GOSS DITCH. 
 
 This is a small ditch on the south side of the river, and is used to 
 irrigate portions of two farms, that of Mr. Percy D. Goss and of the 
 Buckingham estate, in all about 300 acres. Its capacity at present is 
 
 about 20 cubic feet per second, and it is some 2 miles long. Its 
 priorities are, March 20, 1866, 6.41 cubic feet per second, and April 15, 
 L8T5, 80.07 cubic feet per second. According to the findings of the 
 referee, but 400 acres were covered by both appropriations, and but 
 % 2'2^> acres actually irrigated, while the amount actually appropriated 
 was 4.68 cubic feet per second. A third enlargement was claimed, but 
 not allowed. Also, according to the findings, the land requires 0.0208 
 cubic foot per second per acre, or a total of 8.32 cubic feet per second, 
 but in the face of this the court grants 86.48 cubic feet per second, 
 more than ten times what was apparently recommended by the referee. 
 There are no reservoirs under this ditch, but the decree seems to 
 be ample without one. 
 
 HILL AND BRUSH DITCH. 
 
 This is a small private ditch on the north side of the river, near the 
 lower end of the district, It is about 5 miles long, and has a maxi- 
 mum capacity of 15 cubic feet per second, but a decree of 61.8 cubic 
 feet per second. The referee says as this ditch covered 1,500 acres, 
 and required 0.0208 cubic foot per second per acre it had acquired a 
 right to 31.2 cubic feet per second u b3 T construction," though its 
 owners claimed for it 69 cubic feet per second. The court, disregard- 
 ing the findings and recommendations of the referee, gave the ditch a 
 decree of 61.8 cubic feet per second. 
 
 THE LOUDON DITCH. 
 
 The Loudon Ditch is the highest on the stream on the north side, 
 waters land on the Cache la Poudre slope, and is one of the most 
 important in the district. It has good and large priorities, but, hav- 
 ing no reservoirs, is short on late water. There are a few private 
 reservoirs, and some good sites which might be utilized. It is some 
 26 miles in length, counting its more important laterals, irrigates more 
 than 10,000 acres, and covers about 13,000 acres. Its capacity is equal 
 to its first two decrees. This ditch originally covered 400 acres, of 
 which one-half was irrigated. The referee says that the capacity of 
 this old ditch was 21.19 cubic feet per second, but that 40 cubic feet 
 per second were claimed, and it was so allowed. The canal has two 
 later appropriations — 154.3 cubic feet per second November 1, 1877, 
 and L23.48 cubic feet per second September 17, 1883. It is carrying 
 :it present '.♦ cubic feet per second of transferred water; 8 cubic feet per 
 
second from the Big Thompson No. 1 and 1 cubic loot per second from 
 the Big Thompson and Manufacturing Company's Ditch. However, 
 the management deny that they recognize the transfers. Land under 
 this ditch is valued at $60 per acre. 
 
 THE GEORGE RIST DITCH. 
 
 The ditch is used to irrigate land belonging to the Buckingham 
 estate only, about L,800 acres, and has a capacity of 66 cubic feet per 
 second. Formerly its capacity was less than half that amount, but 
 when the Mariano Lake was put to use by the Home Supply Ditch 
 Company, it purchased a right of way through this ditch, enlarging it 
 and making it a feeder for the lake. Besides a money consideration 
 for the right of way, the company assumes the cost of maintenance for 
 its use. The ditch has oik 1 decree only, of 195 cubic feet per second. 
 of date May 1, 1878, though application for decree was made under 
 two dates — May 1, 1873, and July 9, 1875. There had been actually 
 irrigated in the first case but 100 acres, and in the second 2,400 acres. 
 
 HILLSBORO DITCH. 
 
 This is the most important of the lower ditches, as well as one of 
 the largest in the district. It extends from a point on the south bank of 
 the Big Thompson, some 5 miles below Loveland, in a curve around 
 to and across the Little Thompson, and irrigates some land on the 
 south side of that stream, where there is a reservoir to aid in regulat- 
 ing the distribution of the water. The present capacity of the ditch 
 is greater than, or at least equal to, its decree of 153.4 cubic feet per 
 second. This ditch has practically absorbed the Big Thompson No. 1 
 ditch and covers all the latter's land. It has acquired by purchase 28 
 cubic feet per second, and by the transfer of five individual rights 45 
 cubic feet per second more, carrying, therefore, 73 cubic feet per sec- 
 ond of the Big Thompson No. 1 water. It covers nearly 9,000 acres 
 and actually irrigates 5,000 acres or more. Its stock is divided into 
 108 shares, serving 80 acres each, valued at $400 per share; the cost of 
 maintenance is less than $900 per year, and an assessment of $11 per 
 share yearly covers all costs of maintenance, superintendence, and a 
 certain amount of interest on borrowed money. Each share is pre- 
 sumed to furnish 60 " inches" when needed, though much less suffices. 
 This ditch has three decrees, as follows: 
 
 Decreed rights of Hillsboro Ditch. 
 
 Date. 
 
 Quantity. 
 
 Cubic feet 
 p< r s< e. 
 
 - 25 
 99. 4t> 
 45.69 
 
 Area. 
 
 October 15, 1ST 1 
 
 
 Acres. 
 300 
 
 April 15, 1878 
 
 1,S00 
 
 October 6, 1881 
 
 3,000 
 
 
28 
 
 There seems here to be rather a flexible rule for estimating th< 
 amount of water required per acre in granting the decree. Its con- 
 struction is said to have been "difficult," probably due to the fact that 
 an attempt was here made to get water up on to the mesa. Others oi 
 later const ruction arc accounted "easy of construction' 1 under similar 
 circumstances. 
 
 THE HANDY DITCH. 
 
 The head gate of this ditch (see frontispiece) is the highest on the 
 river, and the ditch covers the highest Irrigated land on the south side. 
 It is about 22 miles long, covering some 15,000 acres and actually irri- 
 gating more than 12.500. Its capacity is about 250 cubic feet per sec- 
 ond, and it is used Largely to till the numerous private reservoirs 
 under it. A large part of the area irrigated lies on the Little Thomp- 
 son slope, which is accounted the best land in the district; certain it is 
 that the land under this and the Home Supply Ditch lies ideally for 
 irrigating and is wonderfully productive, and. taken as a whole, will 
 average $50 per acre in price. This ditch is unfortunate in the small- 
 ness of its first decree and in its not possessing reservoirs to furnish 
 late water. Both these defects are largely counterbalanced by the 
 numerous private reservoirs under it. This ditch is especially famous 
 on account of its lawsuits, and will be frequently referred to hereafter 
 in that connection. As to its priorities, it has one of February 28, 
 1878, for 31.2 cubic feet per second and one of December 15, 1880, of 
 111.23 cubic feet per second. 
 
 The findings of the referee are different in this case from those to 
 w T hich attention has been called. The application states that there were 
 10,000 acres under the canal February 28, 1878, and that the amount 
 claimed was 520 cubic feet per second. The referee then says that the 
 amount of water appropriated was 31.2 cubic feet per second. Of his 
 own volition he states: "I find, further, that the ditch was enlarged." 
 The owners never claimed an enlargement in their application. The 
 facts were that the ditch was built the first year full size to a rock cut, 
 and beyond the rock cut full size again; but in order to get water for 
 the crops of that year the cut was not built full size, but was com- 
 pleted two years later. The referee evidently considered the capacity 
 of a ditch the capacit} x of its smallest part, and the court agreed with 
 him. This was really the beginning and cause of the Handy Ditch's 
 subsequent legal contests, though most of the cases involved in no 
 way the decree to the Handy. The Handy Ditch Company has 
 acquired by purchase the Big Thompson Irrigation Ditch, known as 
 No. 5. with a priority of 78 cubic feet per second. As stated before, 
 it is now allowed to draw 20 cubic feet per second of this water, and it 
 lias had transferred to it <i cubic feet per second from No. 2, or the Big 
 Thompson and Manufacturing Company's Ditch, so that it has 26 cubic 
 
U. S. Dept. of Agr., Bui. 1 18, Office of E.*pt. Stations. Irrigation Investigations. 
 
 Plate II. 
 
29 
 
 feet of water per second <>i' very early priority, besides it- first 31.2 
 cubic feet per second to supply domestic needs and Late crops. 
 
 THE SOUTH SIDE DITCH. 
 
 This is a small ditch beading jus! inside the canyon, with only the 
 Handy and Home Supply ditches above it on the river. It covers 
 about 2,000 acres and irrigates nearly that area: it bas a capacity of 
 less than 35 cubic feet per second, though its decree calls for 50.3 
 cubic feet per second. The acreage and capacity at the time of the 
 flecree was about one-half of this amount, the enlargement being made 
 in consequence of the purchase of water from the Big Thompson and 
 Manufacturing Company's Ditch. The amount purchased was 6 cubic 
 feet per second and the price $1,500. The ditch stock is divided into 
 175 shares at £5<> per share, and a share is supposed to irrigate L0 
 acres. The land under this ditch has an average value of $40 per acre. 
 The cost of maintenance and of superintendence is about $100 per 
 year each. 
 
 THE HOME SUPPLY DITCH. 
 
 This ditch, the second on the river, is likewise one of the largest and 
 most important in the district. It, with the Handy, irrigates by far 
 the greater part of the land on the south side. It is finely constructed, 
 with a good masonry dam in the river (PI. II). The upper end is in 
 a rock cut, and its rating Hume is the most permanent on the river. 
 The canal with its laterals is some 32 miles long and covers 19,000 
 acres, actually irrigating 18,000 acres. It has the best reservoir system 
 in the district, running water from its reservoirs directly onto the land 
 and exchanging with the river. Notwithstanding its very late priority, 
 its lands are as well supplied as any. Under it are a relatively large 
 percentage of the late crops; winter wheat, in particular, being raised, 
 the acreage of which is increasing every year. The yield is in excess 
 of 30 bushels of wheat per acre. There are 2,001 shares in the com- 
 pany, each 15 shares equal to a 160-acre water right. The value per 
 share is £150. practically $10 per acre. In 1881 this company acquired 
 the Lone Tree Reservoir and in 1888 the Mariano Lake. It has pur- 
 chased 24 cubic feet of water per second from the Big Thompson Man- 
 
 , ufacturing Ditch, at a price said to be $1,000 per cubic foot per second. 
 
 ! Figuring the value of a foot from the value of the shares, it would 
 be $2,250, As this, however, includes reservoir rights as well, it is 
 hardly a fair estimate of the value of a cubic foot of water per second. 
 
 i It is said by parties under the ditch that as much water is run in 
 
 : September as in June. This is nearer the truth under the Home Sup- 
 ply than under any other ditch or system of the district; at the same 
 time its entire accuracy is open to question. 
 The ditch has acquired by the transfer of the shares of live different 
 
30 
 
 parties L0, 4, 3, 3, and 2 cubic feet of water per second from the Big 
 Thompson No. 1 ditch, for the carrying of which they charge 50 per 
 cent of the water carried. 
 
 The cost of operation is for superintendence $1,500 and for repair;: 
 about $350 per year. 
 
 RESERVOIRS. 
 
 The reservoir system of district No. 4, while not as complicated a^ 
 that of district No. 3, a is as well developed and as efficient. No more 
 water escapes from district No. 4: than from district No. 3, and prob- 
 ably not as much. Its inlet ditches are comparatively short and the 
 reservoirs lie at a good elevation, making it unnecessary in all but one 
 case to discharge into the river and take water in exchange. 
 
 Almost all the reservoir sites are found to be natural depressions. 
 These depressions often form natural reservoirs and contain water 
 drained into them from the surrounding lands; others have the rim 
 depressed at one point, and through this break the water escapes. In 
 improving the sites a dam is thrown across the lowest point in the rim 
 and the capacity of the reservoir largely increased. The dams are 
 generally of earth riprapped with stone, with outlet pipes running 
 through them, controlled by valves. 
 
 The soil in these reservoirs being the washings from the surrounding 
 lands and of an adobe or clay character, is almost impervious, and forms 
 an excellent bottom, through which very little water escapes. 
 
 Very few reservoirs have been made by placing dams across water 
 courses, as they are much more expensive, as well as more dangerous, 
 the sudden floods often endangering the structures and necessitating 
 the construction of proper wasteways and constant watching. In such 
 reservoirs, also, considerable annoyance and expense is incurred on 
 account of the necessity for allowing the natural flow to pass unimpeded 
 through them when the water is needed for direct irrigation by the 
 ditches below. 
 
 Fortunately, there is an abundance of good natural sites in this dis- 
 trict other than those found in the beds of the streams. Some excel- 
 lent sites which exist in the mountains have not been utilized, as those 
 in the immediate vicinity of the farms could be constructed more 
 cheaply and more easily controlled. Storing water in the mountains 
 necessitates the use of the river channel to convey it to the head of 
 the ditch which carries it to the land irrigated. Here a division of the 
 reservoir water and the natural flow of the stream must be made. 
 
 "In U. S. Dept. Agr., Office of Experiment Station?, Bulletin No. 92, on "The 
 Reservoir System of the Cache la Poudre Valley," by the late E. S. Nettleton, will 
 be found an excellent description of the reservoirs and reservoir sites of district No. 3. 
 What is there said is equally true of the reservoirs of district No. 4. The general 
 physical characteristics and the method of management, construction, and distri- 
 bution are the same. 
 
31 
 
 Losses occur in transit from numerous causes. To have a keeper at 
 the lake is an expense, and communication between the lake and the 
 
 farm is slow and difficult. 
 
 On the Big Thompson few reservoirs are owned by the ditch com- 
 panies or by tin 4 users in common; the majority being private in their 
 character, are used principally to irrigate the lands of the owners. If 
 
 a reservoir owner has a surplus, however, he may sell water to his 
 neighbors. Becoming a chattel when stored, reservoir water i- under 
 the absolute control of its owner, and valuable accordingly. 
 
 Reservoirs were developed much later than ditches, for until a 
 scarcity was felt there was no necessity for them. Prior to the time, 
 however, when such necessity existed, reservoirs were, nevertheless, 
 coming into existence through natural causes and through no effort on 
 the part of the irrigator. In the natural depressions mentioned, the 
 surplus, the waste, and seepage water found a resting place. Land 
 being abundant, no effort was made to drain the natural lakes so 
 formed, which were found to be useful for stock purposes. Later fish 
 were put into them, ice was cut, and in numerous ways their conven- 
 ience and value became apparent. When the ditches were not running, 
 it was soon discovered that by a little labor in excavating a trench 
 through the rim water could be taken from these lakes for irrigating 
 early crops or for plowing, and the uses naturally grew as water 
 became more scarce. This was the condition until about 1880, when 
 it began to be recognized that the rivers were overappropriatcd dur- 
 ing low water, and the ditches constructed about that time saw in 
 stored water their only assurance of an adequate suppl}\ The Home 
 Supply Ditch Compan} T was the first deliberately to build a canal in 
 the face of a short supply with the avowed purpose of storing the 
 floods and using reservoir water as its main supply. Its wisdom 
 has been demonstrated by the success of this canal and reservoir sys- 
 tem, which, notwithstanding the lateness of the decree, always has 
 an abundance of water. Before 1880 there was little diversity in the 
 crops sown in the district. Aside from native hay, grain was the prin- 
 cipal product and required irrigation at about the time of the maxi- 
 mum discharge of the river. These conditions, together with a more 
 evenly distributed as w T ell as later maximum How than now, delayed 
 the recognition of the overappropriation of the river and the neces- 
 sity for reservoirs. The increase of the area cultivated at length 
 show r ed the overappropriation and the growing of alfalfa increased the 
 demand for late water for the irrigation of its second and third crops. 
 
 Requiring little engineering skill and but a small amount of capital 
 and labor, the construction of the reservoirs kept pace with the demand 
 until now the time has arrived when there is a scarcity of water for 
 storage purposes. With the numerous demands upon the river, unless 
 the reservoir has a fairly early priority, or is small, or has a very large 
 
32 
 
 supply canal, it often happens that the short high flood period is not 
 sufficient to till the reservoir. This condition has retarded reservoir 
 construction somewhat, the greater growth being in increasing the 
 capacity of reservoirs already constructed and in enlarging the inlet 
 
 canals. There are numerous undeveloped sites in the district, the 
 more important of which are enumerated further on. By the use of 
 these and the enlargement of the inlet canals very little water indeed 
 would escape and then only in time of unusual Hoods. 
 
 The great incentive at present for the construction of reservoirs is to 
 supply water to late crops; sugar beets are becoming a factor in the 
 water problem and require considerable late water; potatoes likewise 
 require irrigation late in the season, and winter wheat, now so popu- 
 
 TtrSu 
 
 JAN. 
 10 20 
 
 FEB. 
 10 20 
 
 MARCH 
 10 20 
 
 APRIL 
 10 20 
 
 MAY 
 10 20 
 
 JUNE 
 10 20 
 
 C 93 
 
 TZW^ 
 
 JULY 
 10 20 
 
 AUG. 
 10 20 
 
 SEPT. 
 10 20 
 
 OCT. 
 10 20 
 
 NOV. 
 10 20 
 
 DEC. 
 10 20 
 
 y<r (/ire 
 
 Fi<;. 1.— Diagram showing the water supply from Big Thompson Creek, and the manner of its use. 
 
 lar, must be irrigated in the fall. With alfalfa, followed by potatoes 
 and beets, and these in turn followed by winter wheat, even the rota- 
 tion of crops docs not lessen the demand for reservoir water. In the 
 diagram (fig. 1) the average water supply for the different months of 
 the year is represented graphically, platted to accord with the figures 
 given in the tables of discharge. It will be seen that there is a surplus 
 available for storage from October to June, while there is a demand 
 for stored water during June, July, August, and September. On the 
 plat the dotted lines represent the average amount of water used during 
 each month. In arriving at these quantities estimates were obtained 
 from several of the former water commissioners and from the present 
 commissioner of the amount of water used for direct irrigation each 
 month and the amount drawn from reservoirs. They furnished esti- 
 
33 
 
 unites also of the percentage which would be used each month, if 
 the irrigators under the present crop conditions could have the water 
 whenever they wished. 
 
 Similar statements and estimates were obtained from several of the 
 officials of the larger ditches mid from such consumers as could be 
 reached. With these statements, and a knowledge of the average 
 How for each month, the conclusions were as shown on the diagram. 
 The opinions unci figures were remarkably uniform in general state 
 ment, the greatest difference of opinion being as to the relative use of 
 water for July and for August. Those contending thai the use was 
 greater in August were under a ditch with good reservoirs, while 
 those who believed it was the greater in July were irrigating with water 
 direct from the river. The commissioners were inclined to believe 
 the use in July was the greater, and, considering the flow in the stream, 
 such appears to he the case. The figures on which the diagram is based 
 are e/iven in the following table: 
 
 WaU r supply from the Big Thompson liner, with the average amount of water used, variovs 
 uses t,i which it is [ml, and probable time of use of additional stored water. 
 
 
 Direct irrigation. 
 
 Average amount of 
 
 Water 
 unused. 
 
 Possible 
 increase 
 
 of stor- 
 age. 
 
 
 Month. 
 
 Average 
 discharge 
 
 of river. 
 
 Average 
 used. 
 
 Amount 
 necessary 
 to supply 
 demand. 
 
 reservoir water. 
 
 Time of 
 increased 
 
 
 Used. 
 
 Stored. 
 
 use. 
 
 
 i 'ubicfeet 
 pt ,■ sec. 
 
 60 
 GO 
 100 
 
 Cubic feet 
 p< e sec. 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 75 
 
 B50 
 
 050 
 
 400 
 
 220 
 
 100 
 
 25 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 Cubic feet 
 
 p, r s,r. 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 75 
 
 350 
 
 1,000 
 
 800 
 
 700 
 
 400 
 
 25 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 Cubic Jut 
 
 pre s< C. 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 50 
 
 250 
 
 350 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 00 
 
 Cubic Jut 
 
 per sec. 
 30 
 30 
 70 
 150 
 150 
 
 Cubic feet 
 per sec. 
 30 
 30 
 30 
 25 
 41 
 
 Cubic Jut 
 i>'_ r si c. 
 20 
 20 
 20 
 20 
 30 
 20 
 15 
 5 
 00 
 
 it; 
 
 20 
 20 
 
 Cubic feet 
 
 p> r sic. 
 
 
 
 
 
 April 
 
 May 
 
 250 
 644 
 
 
 
 
 834 
 165 
 
 230 
 
 111 
 
 71 
 
 54 
 
 00 
 
 150 1 34 
 35 ! 30 
 00 ! 10 
 11 00 
 30 16 
 30 1 24 
 30 30 
 
 10 
 
 Julv 
 
 40 
 
 August 
 
 106 
 
 
 50 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Average 
 
 Acre-feet 
 
 237 
 171,729 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 100, 27 i 
 
 
 43, 170 
 
 43, 170 18, 287 
 
 12, 389 
 
 12, 389 
 
 The first column is simply the recorded flow of the stream; the 
 second is an average of the amount of water used directly on the land, 
 and is the result of a comparison of the reports of the superintendent 
 and of the commissioners of irrigation who have direct control of the 
 water distribution. The ilow of the stream as recorded, and the fact 
 that much of the loss is during extensive Hoods, though this loss is 
 generally for a very short period, have been considered in making the 
 table. The conclusions given in the third column are taken from fig- 
 ures furnished Irv the superintendents and commissioners, and it is 
 probably the most nearly correct column in the table. After June and 
 until October there is a greater demand than the average flow of the 
 stream, and yet during June and July water is stored. The demand 
 2817— No. 118—02 3 
 
34 
 
 La iu»t a fluctuating quantity, but is steadily Increasing or decreasing, 
 while the flow of the streams is fluctuating, often violently, during 
 these months. Also, \\ bile the average demand, in June for example, 
 i- for L,000 cubic feel per second, the greater part of the demand is in 
 the latter part of the month. The greater pari of the storage is done 
 therefore early in June. In July the storing is done during the peri- 
 odical rises only, while during the winter months the loss of what 
 might be stored (see sixth column of table) is occasioned largely by 
 the freezing of the ditches, and for that reason in estimating the addi- 
 tional amount that might be stored, about one-third is deducted from 
 the total loss at present. A little care would almost always permit 
 the entire amount in the river to be stored. The last column is an 
 exhibition of when the additional water so stored would be used. 
 according to those best informed on the matter. It is agreed that at 
 present the early water is forcing the planting of early maturing crops, 
 though these are not as profitable as the later ones. 
 
 Development in reservoirs is not restricted to the water now going 
 to waste, for it will he profitable to store the water which even now is 
 being used for direct irrigation and save it for the more profitable late 
 products. With potatoes producing an average of *l<>n annually per 
 acre, and beets two-thirds that amount, neither using much more water 
 in a season than is necessary for a $20 alfalfa or wheat crop, the build- 
 ing of what we might call iretarding or temporary storage reservoirs 
 can not he other than profitable. To the construction of retarding 
 reservoirs the demand for direct irrigation acts as a check, and the 
 true status of the right of such reservoirs to store water is yet to be 
 determined. In some districts it is the custom to allow temporary 
 storage of water taken from the river on a " direct irrigation " pri- 
 ority; in others it is looked upon as illegal. One side argues that water 
 alike in quantity and time would be taken from the common source in 
 any case, and that it makes no difference to later ditches whether it is 
 actually applied at once or after a short interval. The other side con- 
 tends that only when not needed for immediate use may it be stored, 
 and that the storing will increase the area irrigated and the consequent 
 withdrawal of a larger total amount during the season. There can be 
 no question as to which would be for the greater good of the community 
 as a whole, but the established rights of individuals must be respected. 
 
 Returning again to the diagram and table, we tind that 237 cubic 
 feet per second represents the average discharge for the year, or about 
 171,729 acre-feet: that 100,271 acre-feet are used for direct irrigation: 
 about 43,000 acre-feet are stored: about 18,000 acre-feet escape, and 
 it is possible to store a little over 12,000 acre-feet more than is stored 
 at present. 
 
 It appears that during April. May, and June equal amounts of water 
 are stored. The commissioners differ somewhat as to this, but incline 
 to the belief that more is stored in June. A necessary correction. 
 
U. S. Dept. of Age, Bui. 118, Office of Expt. Stations. Irrigation Investigations. 
 
 Plate III. 
 
85 
 
 however, which they hare not considered is the amount of water 
 which is stored in fact, but is supposed to be diverted for direct use. 
 The private reservoirs especially practice storing their pro rata of 
 
 ditch water when they do not need it for direct use. Man\ system- 
 atically store water at nights and on Sundays, and in the aggregate 
 this is no inconsiderable amount. The practice is indulged in very 
 early in the season, as the reservoirs are empty and a general fear 
 exists that they may not be entirely filled; later, when many of the 
 reservoirs are full, this practice stops. For this reason the quantity 
 stored during April and May is made larger than would at first thought 
 seem proper. 
 
 On the diagram will be noted small circles scattered over the por- 
 tion representing the months of May, June, July, and August. These, 
 with the year indicated, represent the highest water for these years. 
 
 In the following descriptions of reservoirs those under each ditch 
 are given together to enable one to form an estimate of the value of 
 the reservoir and ditch as a system. The list contains many reservoirs 
 of little importance, and these are inserted more with a view to mak- 
 ing- the list complete than to their value. 
 
 RESERVOIRS UNDER THE LOVELAND AND GREELEY CANAL. 
 
 LAKE LOVELAND. 
 
 This is the largest lake in the district, and one of the most noted in 
 the State, not only for its size and capacity, but for the amount of 
 land dependent upon it for water. The land irrigated has generall} T a 
 ditch right, as well as reservoir right, reserving the latter until late in 
 the season. 
 
 The reservoir covers -±72 acres, and is located near the north bound- 
 ary of the town of Loveland. It is a natural depression which was 
 enlarged and improved by the building of a dike along the south side, 
 18 feet high, 20 feet wide on top, with a slope of 3 to 1 on the inner 
 face and 1£ to 1 on the outer face; the inner face is well riprapped 
 with stone. A tunnel, lined with concrete, three-fourths of a mile 
 long and 5 feet in diameter, furnishes ample outlet facilities and dis- 
 charges into the Loveland and Greeley Canal. A brick tower near 
 the south side of the lake at the upper end of the tunnel contains 
 the mechanism for opening and closing the gates (PL III). The gate- 
 are of iron sliding in grooves outside the tower and operated by a 
 threaded rod. worm gear, and wheel. The amount discharged through 
 the tunnel seldom exceeds 350 cubic feet per second. The inlet ditch, 
 known as the Old Barnes Ditch, has its head gate 3^ miles above the 
 reservoir, and a capacity of more than 400 cubic feet per second, though 
 on account of the danger of breaking where it runs along a side hill, 
 275 cubic feet per second is about the maximum carried. 
 
36 
 
 The reservoir has ;i maximum available capacity of 1.3,000 acre-feet 
 and an unavailable capacity of 7,000 acre-feet. At the various depths 
 it lias the following capacities: 
 
 ( 'opacity of Lake Loveland. 
 
 Feet. 
 
 Acre- 
 feet. 
 
 
 
 -.7. (Mill 
 
 5 
 
 1. Ill III 
 
 in 
 
 2.00U 
 
 15 
 
 3,300 
 
 20 
 
 l.7i hi 
 
 
 6,300 
 
 30 
 
 8,000 
 
 
 9,900 
 
 Hi 
 
 13,000 
 
 a Unavailable. 
 
 The cost of the construction of the reservoir was about $125,000, 
 and the present cash value of each of the 300 shares is $750. One 
 hundred and thirty-five shares were sold some years ago, 1<><> being 
 taken on a guaranty before the work of construction was beerun, and 
 35 -old at irregular intervals during the seven years since the reser- 
 voir has been in operation. During the present year some 4-0 shares 
 were sold, more than during the entire time previously, and at the 
 full cash value. A sudden awakening seems to have come as to the 
 value of reservoirs for late water, due in a measure to the advent of 
 the sugar beet. It is probable that the remainder of the 300 rights 
 will be disposed of before many years, and at an advanced price. 
 
 In delivering water from tin 1 reservoir the wishes of a majority of 
 the farmers have been considered in determining the time when the 
 water is to be run. The difference in location and a considerable 
 difference in the crops raised on the upper and lower parts of the 
 ditch often caused a conflict between these two sections on this point. 
 The lower ditch, having a considerable majority, generally had its 
 way. It is proposed, however, hereafter, so far as is practicable, to 
 consider the needs of each farm and to divide the ditch into at least 
 two sections. A now of 1.44 cubic feet per second is accounted the 
 equivalent of an 80-acre water right, and that amount is turned out 
 for each right, measured over a weir, the total amount being measured 
 in a rating flume near the mouth of the tunnel. h\ the description of 
 the Loveland and Greeley Canal it is stated that more than 21,000 acres 
 were actually irrigated by it. It is interesting to know that after the 
 1st of July practically no water direct from the river is used on 
 17,000 acres of this land, the other 4,000 being served by the old free 
 rights. Much of this 4,000 acres possesses reservoir rights also. 
 There are in use 175 shares of reservoir rights of 80 acres each, or in 
 all 14,000 acres. 
 
37 
 
 » During the year L901 the following runs were bad from the lake on 
 
 this land: 
 
 Runs of water from Lah Fx>veland } 1901. 
 
 Date. 
 
 July 21 to July 27 
 
 Augusl 2 to August 7 
 
 August 1 I to A.UgUfi1 19 
 
 August 26 i" September l . . . 
 September c> t<> September 13 
 
 Total 
 
 
 Cubic feet. 
 
 feet. 
 
 6 91,806,000 
 
 78, - 
 5 69,200,000 
 
 84,034,000 
 • 021,000 
 
 2,108 
 1,809 
 
 1 . 929 
 1,814 
 
 28 102 
 
 9,249 
 
 At the end of the season there remained 9.5 feet in the lake to be 
 drawn off, about 2,000 acre-feet. Without counting loss, which is 
 probably made up by seepage into the ditch, the reservoir furnished 
 practically a depth of * inches over all the land possessing reservoir 
 rights. 
 
 The amount of water run into the ditch, as nearly as can be deter- 
 mined, was, prior to April 30, 2,91 £ acre-feet; in May. 5,139 acre-feet; 
 in June. ir>. '.mm) acre-feet; in July. 7,068 acre-feet; in August, L,916 
 acre-feet: in September, 870acre-feet — a total of 38,946 acre-feet; but 
 this water was subject to the demand of nearly the entire 21,000 acres, 
 making a depth of 1.85 feet. 
 
 THE BIG CUT RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is located in sec. 6, T. 5 X.. R. 67 W., covers 76 acres, 
 and contains 1 ,150 acre-feet of water when tilled to its full capacity. 
 It is filled from the Loveland and Greeley Canal during high water. 
 
 DARROUGH LAKE. 
 
 This is situated in sees, -rand 9, T. 5 N., R. 68 \Y\. has a capacity of 
 400 acre-feet, and is about 60 acres in area. It is supplied with water 
 from the Loveland and Greeley Canal. 
 
 THE SANBORN RESERVOIRS NOS. 1 AND 2. 
 
 These reservoirs are owned by private individuals. Together they 
 are supposed to contain -J-oo acre-feet, but have not been used to any 
 considerable extent. They can be tilled from tin 1 Loveland and Greeley 
 Canal and gather some seepage water. They were intended to supply 
 domestic water in the immediate vicinity of Greeley by means of a 
 pipe line run from them. 
 
 The reservoir sites under the Loveland and Greeley Canal are few, 
 viz. the Dawkins, in sees. 21 and 28, T. 5 X.. R. 67 W.; the Basch, 
 capacity 25 acre-feet, in sec. 10, T. 5 X.. R. 68 W.; the Steele, with 
 an area of 7 acres and a capacity of 25 acre-feet, and the Steele and 
 
38 
 
 Phillips, in sec 16, T. 5 X.. EL 66 W., macros in area and having a 
 capacity of 35 acre-feet. These are unimportant in point of capacity 
 and can be used only for very limited areas. 
 
 RESERVOIRS UNDER THE LOUDON DITCH. 
 
 Under the Loudon Ditch there are several small reservoirs and some 
 very fine reservoir sites; the main difficulty met with, however, is the 
 distance of the better sites from the head urates of the supply canals. 
 The reservoir sites are natural depressions without outlet- and conse- 
 quently tunnels or cuts must be made through which to draw the 
 water. On account of the loss of head and the location of the basins 
 below the head gates of the ditches of the district an exchange of water 
 from them with other ditches is difficult. If discharged into the river 
 there would he no ditches below to take tin 1 water and use it. as the 
 Mariano Lake now exchanges with tin' lower ditches to almost their 
 full rights. 
 
 BENSON LAKE. 
 
 Benson Lake is situated in the X. i of sec. 10, T. :> X.. R. 69 W. 
 It is owned by A. S. Benson, of Loveland. and used by him to sup- 
 plement his supply from the Barnes Ditch for about -!<»<> acres of land. 
 By the use of the reservoir Mr. Benson says the amount of land irri- 
 gated is twice what it otherwise would be. The reservoir has an 
 available capacity of about 300 acre-feet. 
 
 THE RENTAL. 
 
 This is a small lake of about 1<» acres in sec. 2. T. 5 N., R. 69 W.\ 
 tilled from the Loudon Ditch and supplements the irrigation of some 
 60 acres. The capacity is about 50 acre-feet. 
 
 SEVEN LAKES. LOUDON AND BOYD LAKES. 
 
 These form a system lying close together some 3 miles northeast of 
 Loveland. and for the most efficient use are largely dependent on each 
 other. The Loudon Lake, which is the most northerly, has been in 
 operation for some time, and by decree has aright to50;000,000 cubic 
 feet, or 1.148 acre-feet. Its priority is dated February 24. 1883, and 
 is the sixth on the Bio- Thompson River. This lake is located mainly 
 in sec. 30, T. 6 X.. R. 68 W., on the line of the Loudon lateral, and is 
 used as an auxiliary supply for some 2,000 acres of land on the Cache 
 la Poudre slope. It covers about 65 acres to a depth of 28 feet. The 
 area of land irrigated by the Loudon lateral by reason of the avail- 
 ability of the water from this reservoir is at least doubled. The reser- 
 voir, with its outlet ditch, was bought by the Seven Lakes Company. 
 The vear 1901 was the first season for the Seven Lakes and was fairlv 
 
39 
 
 satisfactory . What its future usefulness will be has not yet been 
 determined, the first season developing a number of unforseen diffi- 
 culties and conflicting legal claims. 
 
 The reservoirs are supplied partly by seepage and waste water, but 
 tins source, even augmented by flood water-, which are not inconsid- 
 erable, is entirely insufficient. Dependence must be placed, therefore, 
 on a supply from the Loudon Hitch, and -0» shares in thai ditch were 
 purchased, the intention being to till all the reservoirs through the 
 Loudon Reservoir with water furnished to these shares. As water 
 can not legally he stored when needed for direct irrigation an injunc- 
 tion immediately stopped the practice and the question will be Anally 
 
 settled in the courts. 
 
 In addition to this difficulty the Loudon Ditch Company does not 
 feel hound to allow the use of the canal as a supply ditch for the Seven 
 Lakes, at least not without compensation. 
 
 The Seven Lakes Company contracted with the Loveland and 
 Greeley Ditch to carry 56 cubic feet of water per second to lands under 
 that ditch. On account of the smallness of the outlet and the small 
 difference in level between the lakes and the ditch, not more than 40 
 cubic feet per second could be discharged into the Loveland and 
 Greeley ('anal, and when the water in the reservoir had been lowered, 
 20 cubic feet per second was the most that could be drawn. Some 
 difficulties in dividing the water of the reservoir and of the ditch 
 developed, but these can probably be (nisi ly overcome as the conditions 
 are better known. 
 
 With ample supply facilities, the capacity of the reservoirs could be 
 increased by additional embankments 130,000,000 cubic feet, and by 
 drawing off the low water in reservoirs Nos. 1. 2. and 3 into Boyd Lake 
 100,ooo,O(M> cubic feet of now unavailable water could be used. This, 
 with the 330,000,000 cubic feet capacity at present, would make 
 560,000,000 cubic feet, or 12,856 acre-feet— almost equal to Lake Love- 
 land. Most of this water would be used on the Cache la Poudre slope 
 or at the lower end of this district. 
 
 Boyd Lake and South Lake, natural bodies of water separated by a 
 low ridge, have been examined and reported on by Captain Chitten- 
 den, U. S. Army". It is one of the best sites in the State. The plan 
 outlined by Captain Chittenden is for the development of the greatest 
 capacity of the lake. However, by filling the lake and sluicing out 
 the cut to a less depth than was contemplated, the cost would be vastly 
 less than the estimated cost under the Chittenden plan, and yet would 
 be ample to store the available water. 
 
 Two small reservoirs exist in sec. 2, T. 5 X.. R. 69 W.. and cover 
 some 10 acres each. Their combined capacity is perhaps 100 acre-feet, 
 and they are used as an auxiliary supply on the lands of the owners. 
 
 a House Doc. 141, 55th Cong., 2d session. 
 
40 
 
 The reservoir sites under the Loudon Ditch are comparatively .small 
 and few in number, aside from the Seven Lakes and Boyd system. 
 
 There is a site belonging to A. S. Benson in the 8. i of sec. 10, T. 
 5 N., 11. 69 \\\. and one belonging to A. S. Benson and A. Rist in see. 
 9, T. 5 N., R. 69 VY . These have an area of 50 acres each and could 
 possibly be made to have L5 feet of available depth. 
 
 George W. Alford has a site in the NE. i of sec. 2, T. 5 N., R. 69 
 \\\. possibly 20 acres in area and lo feet available depth. 
 
 The Fairport Lake, in sec. 13, T. 6 N., K. 69 W., is on the Cache la 
 Poudre slope, connected with the Cache la Poudre by an inlet canal. 
 It has an area of 53 acres and a capacity of 575 acre-feet. It con- 
 tributes to the irrigation of some L,500 acres. 
 
 RESERVOIRS UNDER THE HANDY DITCH. 
 
 Under the Handy Ditch there are. as previously stated, only private 
 reservoirs, although the company will probably very soon take steps 
 to obtain suitable reservoir facilities. 
 
 FRANK LOVELAND RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is located in the NE. i of sec. 15, T. 4 N., R. 69 W., 
 and covers nearly the entire quarter section. It has a capacity of 800 
 acre-feet, which, however, can be greatly increased. By the raising 
 of the dike some 10 feet a capacity of 2,000 acre-feet could be 
 obtained. As the reservoir has recently changed hands, it is probable 
 that this will be done. At present it is not much used for irrigation. 
 
 THE DE FRANCE RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is located in sees. 4, 5, 8, and 9, T. 4 N., R. 68 W., 
 and covers over 50 acres. It is used in irrigating some (loo acres of 
 land and has a capacity of 250 acre-feet. It is most efficient in sup- 
 plying late water. 
 
 THE KEE RESERVOIR. 
 
 The Kee Reservoir is located in the NE. J sec. 17. T. 4 N., R. 69 W., 
 and is tilled through the Handy Ditch in the spring. It is a natural 
 basin, with a dam some 12 feet high, and irrigates about 50 acres. 
 Its capacity is not over loo acre feet. 
 
 THE BROWN RESERVOIR. 
 
 The Brown Reservoir is located in the SW. i sec. 35, T. 5 N., R. 69 
 \\\. receives its supply from the Handy Ditch, and being just above 
 the Home Supply Ditch, exchanges water with it. It has a capacity of 
 65 acre-feet and irrigates souk 1 to acres of land. 
 
41 
 
 
 TTTK WILSON RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is located in the SW. | sec. 20, T. 4 N.. K. 69 W., 
 is filled from the Handy Hitch, irrigates LOO acres, has an area of 30 
 aero, ami a capacity of probably L50 acre-feet. It is proposed to 
 enlarge this reservoir soon. 
 
 THE HUPl' LAKH RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is in the NW. | sec. 35, T. 5 S., R. 69 W.. is filled 
 
 from the Handy Hitch, furnishes late water for L60 acres, and has a 
 capacity of 50 acre-feet, which could be doubled by building a high 
 
 dam. 
 
 THE HUPP RESERVOIR. 
 
 This reservoir is located in sec 28. T. 4: N., R. 69 W., has been 
 practically abandoned, though it contains water from seepage. It was 
 found to injure the land below it, while available to irrigate little land. 
 The capacity was 50 acre-feet. 
 
 THE BERTHOUD TOWN LAKE. 
 
 This lake is used for irrigation in the town of Berthoud, is small 
 and irrigates little land. 
 
 THE JANSEN RESERVOIR. 
 
 The Jansen Reservoir is located in sec. 13, T. 4N„ R. 69 W. ; covers 
 40 acres; it is supplied now from waste and seepage water; is unused 
 at present, but could be developed to cover 100 acres, with a capacity 
 of 1,000 acre-feet. 
 
 THE HUMMEL LAKE. 
 
 This lake is in sec. IT, T. 1 N., R. 6$ W., is owned by J. C. Hum- 
 mel and is used to irrigate the owner's land, some 350 acres. It cov- 
 ers an area of 60 acres and has a capacity of 250 acre-feet. It is tilled 
 through the Handy Ditch in the spring. 
 
 BEASLEY LAKE. 
 
 Beasley Lake is in sec. 11, T. 1 N., R. 69 W., filled by the Handy 
 ditch, is owned by the Loveland Lake and Ditch Company. It covers 
 L55 acres and can be drawn off for a depth of li» feet or about 1,800 
 acre-feet. It furnishes water to some 2,000 acre-, largely potato and 
 sugar-beet land. It cost $14,000 to construct, and is valued at $50,000. 
 
 THE AVELCH RESERVOIRS. 
 
 These are five in number and probably the most important under the 
 Handy Ditch, especially if developed and used to their full capacity. 
 The two more northerly reservoirs, Nos. 3 and 1. are not used at pres- 
 ent. The capacity of the five is 4,400 acre-feet. No. 1. the largest, 
 
42 
 
 covers L27 acres, and has a claimed capacity of 2,500 acre-feet. Nos. 
 2 and 5 have a combined capacity of H5 acre-feet. The reservoirs at 
 present serve about 800 acres. 
 
 THE CHAPMAN RESERVOIR. 
 
 The Chapman Reservoir covers about 70 acres in sec. 32, T. 5 N., 
 lv. 69 W., and irrigates probably not more than 80 acres. Another 
 
 smaller reservoir in the same section is used for stock purposes prin- 
 cipally. 
 
 Some other sites and reservoirs exist under the Handy Ditch, but 
 little could be learned concerning them. The Smith and Welty Lake, 
 in sec. 15, T. 4 N.j K. 68 W., has an area of 25 acres and a capacity of 
 loo acre-feet. The Berthoud Lake, in sec. 11, T. 4 N., R. on W., has 
 an area of -±o acres and a capacity of 250 acre-feet. The Welch Lake, 
 in sec. 25, T. 5 N.. R. 69 W., has an area of 30 acres and a capacity of 
 200 acre-feet. In sees. IT. 20, and 21, T. 4 X.. R. 69 W., are some 
 very fair reservoir sites. Mr. George Zwick owns a good site in sees. 
 17 and 20, T. 4 N.., R. To W. W. T. Newell has a site in sec. 18, T. 
 & N.. R. 68 W.. with an area of about 150 acres. It could be tilled 
 from the Handy Ditch and furnish probably 1,500 acre-feet of water. 
 
 In the tilling- of reservoirs under the Handy Ditch the stockholders 
 are permitted to store water in proportion to the amount of their 
 stock, if they prefer to do so. As between themselves, the water is 
 always divided in proportion to the stock held by each, and no restric- 
 tions are placed on the u9e to which it is put. On account of the 
 smallness of its first priority and the necessary abundance of water in 
 the river before the ditch can draw on its second priority, it is not 
 possible to store water " needed by other ditches for direct irrigation." 
 Whenever the ditch is running 50 cubic feet per second or less it is 
 probable that every user needs his full amount for direct irrigation. 
 
 RESERVOIRS UNDER THE HOME SUPPLY CANAL. 
 
 The reservoirs under the Home Supply Canal are both large and 
 important, and the values of the water rights and of the land equal the 
 oldest rights on the river. 
 
 It is estimated by those best acquainted with the practical working 
 of the Home Supply system that at least three times the area is now 
 irrigated that could be served without the Mariano and Lone Tree 
 lakes; that i> to say. L8,000 acres are now irrigated in place of the 
 (),000 possible with the ditch alone. The land is estimated to be worth 
 two-fifths more with than without reservoir rights: its value under this 
 system being from *4o to $60 per acre. 
 
 Under this system water is sometimes rented to others than stock- 
 holders, the price being $12.50, equal to $1.25 per acre per year, 
 which, considering the certainty of supply and the ability to use it at 
 any time, is very reasonable. 
 
The division of water is somewhat unique. As long as there is a 
 supply in the ditch and the reservoirs are not taking it for storage, the 
 stockholders have what is called "free" water, and do account of its 
 ose or distribution is kept; hut when the reservoirs begin to supply 
 the demand a conservative estimate is made of the amount of water in 
 the lakes available for use, and this amount is divided equally among 
 tin 1 2,001 shares, and each stockholder is credited with his amount in 
 cubic feet. An accurate account is kept of the amount each stock- 
 holder draws, and thi> is charged to him. lie is permitted to draw 
 the full amount as soon as he pleases. When the estimated amount 
 has been drawn off, if there is water in the lake another credit is made 
 as before, and the additional amount can then he demanded. By this 
 system economy is encouraged, a high duty is obtained, and the easy 
 rotation of crops and the planting of whatever seems best are made 
 possible. It eliminates also many causes of controversy. 
 
 In acquiring its reservoirs the Consolidated Home Supply Company 
 purchased in 1881, with $6,000 worth of its stock, the Lone Tree site. 
 The company expended $12,000 on its dam and $10,000 on its tunnel 
 and outlets. (PI. IV.) It has a priority dated August 31, 1881, for 
 400,000,000 cubic feet. To acquire the Mariano Lake the company 
 paid $6,000 for the land and right of way through the Rist Ditch, 
 agreeing to enlarge and maintain it for its use. It expended £4,000 
 on the dam and outlet. (PI. V.) The lake has a priority dated Octo- 
 ber 1, 1875, amounting to 180,865,000 cubic feet. With riprapping 
 and other expenses, the cost of both reservoirs was certainly not over 
 $50,000; this expenditure has increased values of shares probably *1<hi 
 each, a total of $200,100, and has increased the value of the 18,000 
 acres irrigated probably $20 per acre, or $360,000 — all of which goes 
 to show the value of reservoir water. 
 
 In 1901 the distribution of water from the reservoirs began on June 
 1; a number of days of ;; free" water intervened, but from that time 
 to the end of the season water was run continuously from one or both 
 of the reservoirs. It was stated by the secretary that as much reser- 
 voir water was used in September as in June, and that the tendency 
 for a number of years has been to use the water later each year. He 
 also stated that the expenses of repair, maintenance, and distribution 
 would not exceed S2, 000 per year, or about 11 cents per acre irrigated, 
 and with the value of rights at $150. allowing 6 per cent interest, the 
 total cost per year per acre would amount to about $1. 
 
 The Mariano Lake discharges its water into the river, the discharge 
 being limited by the amount to which the ditches below are at the 
 time entitled by their priorities. The ditch takes from the river 
 above a like amount, thus enabling its owners to use the water in the 
 regular way. and the effect is the same as though the reservoir were 
 at the head of and above the ditch. The capacity of Mariano Lake is 
 
44 
 
 probably dow equal to ite decreed priority, but it could ho enlarged to 
 hold at leasl one-third more than that amount. The Lone Tree Lake 
 has a capacity of nearly twice that of the Mariano Lake. Being high 
 enough to irrigate most of the lands under the ditch, it does not 
 exchange water with the river. Such lands as lie above it are sup- 
 plied by that taken in exchange for the Mariano Lake water. 
 
 The following lesser reservoirs are also under or supplied by the 
 I Ionic Supply Ditch: 
 
 The Rist Reservoir, supplied like Mariano Lake, from the Rist Ditch. 
 covers some 40 acres, and is used to irrigate the lands of the Buck- 
 ingham estate, to which it belongs. It has a capacity of 1 L5 acre-feet. 
 
 The Big Hollow Reservoir, a seepage reservoir in sec. 27, T. 5 N.. 
 lv. 68 W.. has a capacity of 30 acre-feet. 
 
 The Allen Reservoir, 6 acres in area, in sec. 6, T. 4 N., R. 07 W., is 
 also a seepage reservoir, with a capacity of about 85 acre-feet, which 
 may be increased. 
 
 The White-Butler Reservoir, on the south side of the Little Thomp- 
 son, has purchased rights from the Home Supply Ditch, Imt it is not 
 properly in the Big Thompson district. 
 
 There is also one other reservoir on the south side of the Little 
 Thompson, but it is supplied by the Hillsboro Ditch: name unknown. 
 It has an area of 160 acres and has a capacity of 1.500 acre-feet. 
 
 
 DUTY OF WATER. 
 
 The data at hand scarcely justifies discussing at any great length 
 the duty of water. To reach results of value would require an exami- 
 nation and classification of the soil under each ditch, the kind of crops 
 raised, and measurement of the water used by each over a series of 
 years. The following table gives, however, such data as has been 
 collected: 
 
 Duty of water on Big Thompson River^ 1901. 
 
 
 ruder Irriga- 
 
 ditCh. Ted. 
 
 Water diverted. 
 
 Name of ditch. 
 
 January 
 
 1 to 
 
 April 30. 
 
 May. 
 
 June. 
 
 July. 
 
 August 
 
 Septem- 
 ber. 
 
 Big Thompson and Manu- 
 facturing Co 
 
 Acres. Acres. 
 
 2,000 1,300 
 
 4,500 3.000 
 
 30,000 21,000 
 
 1.800 j 1,500 
 
 2,000 1,800 
 13,000 10,000 
 
 9,000 5,000 
 15,000 12,500 
 
 2,000 2,000 
 19,000 18, 1 
 
 3,000 640 
 
 1,000 800 
 500 300 
 
 1,000 '.mh> 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 360 
 
 10,278 
 
 1 , 544 
 3,000 
 
 2, 962 
 4,466 
 C». 000 
 
 666 
 
 6, 430 
 
 300 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 70S 
 2.410 
 15,900 
 
 3,080 
 
 3, 11^ 
 5,706 
 
 7,832 
 
 842 
 
 5,058 
 
 300 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 1,086 
 1,338 
 7,068 
 
 1 . 836 
 1,180 
 1,504 
 3, 950 
 2,612 
 
 924 
 :;. 172 
 
 300 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 504 
 
 1,916 
 
 1,043 
 
 212 
 J .770 
 1 . 938 
 1,660 
 626 
 3,052 
 300 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 242 
 
 Farmers' 
 
 
 40 
 
 Loveland and Greeley 
 
 Big Thompson and Platte 
 River 
 
 2,914 
 
 300 
 
 2, 000 
 1,938 
 
 870 
 
 90S 
 
 George Rial 
 
 90 
 
 London 
 
 390 
 
 Hillsboro 
 
 1,220 
 640 
 
 Handy 
 
 3,000 
 
 South Side . . 
 
 180 
 
 Home Supply 
 
 3.000 
 
 1,070 
 
 Big Thompson 
 
 300 
 
 Big Thompson Irrigating ... 
 Risl and Goes 
 
 
 
 
 300 
 500 
 
 600 
 
 400 
 
 700 
 
 
 
 Hill and Brush 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 103,800 78,740 18.159 87.1fifi 51 088 29 37(1 18.857 
 
 5, 950 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U. S. Dept. of Agr., Bui. 1 18, Office of Expt. Stations. Irrigation Investigations. 
 
 Plate IV, 
 
 Fig. 1.— Outlet of Lone Tree Reservoir. 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 :* 
 
 .-- • 
 
 
 
 t "m ■_ iHI ! 
 
 K . • §.*'• ^2*^3^"/' 
 
 
 
 
 ^3 nORkra^v. 
 
 mi 
 
 Fig. 2.— Weir just Below Outlet of Lone Tree Reservoir. 
 

 
U. S. Dopt. of Agr., Bui. 1 18, Offico of Expt. Stations. Irri \ ition Investigations. 
 
 Plate V. 
 
 Fig. 1.— Mariano Reservoir. 
 
 Fig. 2.— Dam of Mariano Reservoir. 
 
45 
 
 Duty oj watei on Big Thompson River, 1901 Continued. 
 
 
 Total 
 
 amount 
 
 used. 
 
 Amount used 
 
 Depth 
 mi laud. 
 
 Feet. 
 
 2. 50 
 1. 55 
 1 . 85 
 
 .-...Mi 
 1.7:; 
 3.30 
 1.71 
 1. (>•_' 
 1 . 58 
 2.34 
 
 Duty of 
 
 1 ciil.ii- 
 fool per 
 second 
 for Mi 
 days. 
 
 diverl 
 ed, L«0 
 
 a parity 
 
 Name of ditch. 
 
 Direct. 
 
 Prom 
 voir. 
 
 voire 
 under 
 
 ditch. 
 
 Big Thompson and Manufacturing 
 Co 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 3,232 
 
 1,652 
 
 38,946 
 
 8,711 
 
 3,600 
 
 17,270 
 
 16, 168 
 
 21,744 
 
 3,238 
 
 28,382 
 
 1,500 
 
 Acre-ft. 
 
 8,232 
 1,652 
 
 25,946 
 8,711 
 3,600 
 9,27(1 
 
 L4.958 
 
 Ki.711 
 3,238 
 
 1 1,382 
 1,500 
 
 
 Acres. 
 
 l 13 
 
 193 
 
 (12 
 
 21 Hi 
 
 L08 
 
 205 
 2211 
 
 L53 
 
 Cubic Jt. 
 
 9 
 
 12.9 
 L08.3 
 
 2 1.2 
 10 
 1^ 
 
 15. 7 
 
 60. I 
 
 '.i 
 
 78. 8 
 LI 
 
 Acre-fL 
 
 
 
 
 Loveland and Greeley 
 
 Hii, r Thompson and Platte River 
 
 i:;, linn 
 
 15,200 
 
 S, HI III 
 
 1,500 
 
 5,1 
 
 
 
 9,<HK) 
 
 Hillsboro 
 
 1,600 
 
 Handy 
 
 7.2IK) 
 
 South Side 
 
 
 
 14,000 
 
 1"., 100 
 
 Big rhompson 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ris1 and < toss 
 
 1,000 
 1,800 
 
 1,000 
 1,800 
 
 
 3.33 
 2.00 
 
 107 
 
 179 
 
 2. 8 
 
 
 Hill and Brush . . . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 150,533 
 
 109, 033 
 
 41,500 
 
 1.91 
 
 187 
 
 418.2 
 
 B.300 
 
 
 It may appear that in considering the duty of water the irrigating 
 
 season of one hundred and eighty days is too long-; that little irrigat- 
 ing is done in April or September. However, it is none too Long, for 
 much of the water is stored in April and represents what a cubic foot 
 per second accomplishes with reservoir facilities or with a diversity 
 of crops. 
 
 A comparison of the above table with the table giving the flow of 
 the river (p. 13) reveals a remarkable agreement between the averages 
 as estimated and what actually occurred in 1901, showing it to be an 
 average year, a conclusion which is confirmed by reports just received 
 from the superintendents and commissioners. 
 
 Allowing for the average amount of water escaping from the district, 
 we have 150.508 acre-feet used and 18,287 acre-feet waste, giving 
 168,820 acre-feet as the discharge of the river, as compared with 171.1 1".> 
 acre-feet, the average for six years, as given in the discharge table; 
 also L09,033 acre-feet used for direct irrigation, as compared with the 
 average of 100,271 acre-feet; 41.5(H) acre-feet stored, as compared 
 with the average of 43,170 acre-feet. In the table the Rist Ditch is 
 given as diverting a total of 9,900 acre-feet, while using but 3,600; 
 the difference, 6,300 acre-feet, was stored in Mariano Lake, and is 
 accordingly charged to the Home Supply Canal, making its total 
 28,382 acre-feet instead of 22,082 acre-feet, the quantity diverted. 
 The duty of water, it will be noticed, for the district i- l v 7 acres per 
 cubic foot per second, running one hundred and eighty days, and the 
 land was covered to an average depth of 1.9 feet. If we add the 
 amount of precipitation on the land, the total depth would probably 
 be nearly 3.5 feet. Rain, however, does little good, since the greater 
 part comes as light showers. Therefore, it is more to the point to con- 
 sider simply the amount of water spread on the land. 
 
46 
 
 It will be noticed from the table that the smaller ditches have a 
 much lower duty than the larger ones, and those with reservoirs gen- 
 erally show a higher duty than those without. One cause of the low 
 duty under the small ditches is that they cover the lowlands lying 
 near the river, which, on aceount of their porous subsoil, require more 
 water, and which, being generally rough, require a larger volume to 
 force the water over the uneven surface. Another cause is that the 
 smaller ditches in this district have the older and probably excessive 
 decrees, making economy of use unnecessary. With these decrees 
 and the poor construction and management of the ditches, it is sur- 
 prising that the duty is not lower than shown. 
 
 It is hard to compare the duty under the ditches with and without 
 reservoirs, as conditions opposite to the above exist under the ditches 
 themselves. Being able to use water when and how it is most bene- 
 ficial, the owners feel that economy of use means greater acreage irri- 
 gated. Loss, of course, occurs from the reservoirs through seepage 
 and evaporation and partially offsets the economy practiced; but as 
 this loss is not allowed for in the tables, it would appear that the 
 better land irrigated, the better management, better ditches, and more 
 economical use not only make up for all loss from the reservoir, but 
 leave a large margin besides. 
 
 SEEPAGE. 
 
 Seepage and return water c upies a position secondary only to the 
 supply furnished by the ditches and reservoirs. While in volume it 
 is small, the regularity and reliability make such waters valuable in 
 irrigation out of all proportion to the quantity. Seepage is in part a 
 necessary result of irrigation, which can not under any condition be 
 remedied; in part a result of the methods, which are theoretical ly 
 wrong, but more economical in practical application, and in part the 
 result of carelessness and ignorance. 
 
 The application of water to the surface of the ground must result in 
 a certain amount percolating through the soil before it is either 
 evaporated or taken up by the growing plant, and ultimately finding 
 its way to the lower level of the water courses. No piping, cementing 
 of canals, or economy of use can avoid this. The value of water and 
 the cost of labor determine at what point it is economy to waste the 
 one and reduce the other, or to save the one and increase the other. 
 In practical irrigating, therefore, it is often economy to use more 
 water than necessary in order to reduce the expense of labor in spread- 
 ing it on the land, and this excess produces increased seepage. The 
 possession of an old and abundant water right does not convey the right 
 to use the privilege wastefully and to the harm of others less fortunate. 
 In practice, however, it is impossible to prevent this abuse, which is 
 
17 
 
 illegal" :um1 to be condemned. It is a delicate matter to determine 
 when and how much water is necessary t<> a piece of land; to step in 
 and say only so much water is needed, when the court has determined 
 that much more i- needed. Only in the most flagrant cases is it 
 possible for the water officials to interfere with what is conceived to 
 be "established rights." Fortunately, much of this water is returned 
 as "•seepage," or. more properly, "waste" water. So prevalent i- 
 this waste that it has become a recognized and reliable source of sup- 
 ply and is almost synonymous with seepage. Nearly all filings, which 
 claim seepage water, claim as well storm and waste water. 
 
 In tin 1 table below are given the claims for water tiled during the 
 last thirteen years on the Big Thompson, showing the activity in the 
 different lines during the different years. 
 
 Filings for water mi Big Thompson River, 1888-1900, as shown by Qu records of tlw oilier 
 
 of the Stati enginei r. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Reservoirs. 
 
 Seepage reservoirs. 
 
 Ditch.-. 
 
 Seepage ditches. 
 
 N... 
 
 Capacity. 
 
 No. 
 
 Capacity. 
 
 No. 
 
 Capacity. 
 
 Cubit- fit 
 
 pt 1- sec. 
 233. 00 
 
 :;7. ii 
 
 27. 18 
 71.20 
 
 No. 
 
 Capacity. 
 
 1888 
 
 1 
 
 cubic feet. 
 200, 000, 000 
 
 
 < 'uhic ft < t. 
 
 1 
 3 
 3 
 
 Cubit- fit 
 
 pi i- sec. 
 
 1889 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 L890 
 
 7 
 9 
 
 323, 100, 000 
 696,034,831 
 
 
 
 
 1891 .. 
 
 
 
 ..... 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 ■j 
 
 :! 
 
 1 
 :. 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 
 L892 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 1, It IS, 000 
 
 7.L'S-_>.(|(K) 
 1,350.000 
 
 •S.IKt 
 
 1893 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 3,329,666,000 
 
 600,259,000 
 
 1,305,972,360 
 
 
 
 :; 50 
 
 1894 
 
 
 
 If.. 70 
 
 1895 
 
 
 
 IT 
 
 L896 
 
 5 
 
 279, 94% 000 
 
 
 
 135.00 
 
 is<>7 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 4-2, 169,000 
 23, 270, 000 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 26.60 
 L2.85 
 
 6.00 
 
 1898 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 7(1,125,000 
 248,000,000 
 
 22. 65 
 
 1899 
 
 58.50 
 
 l'JOO 
 
 3 
 
 o;;2,35fi,000 
 
 
 
 5.00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 •M 
 
 6, 853, 427, 191 
 221,078,296 
 
 17 
 
 608, 174,000 
 35,774,941 
 
 12 
 
 408. 47 
 34.04 
 
 26 
 
 267. 85 
 
 Average 
 
 10.30 
 
 
 
 
 It might be said that most of the filings to 1893 were for reservoirs 
 already in existence, as the Mariano, Lone Tree, and Loveland lakes. 
 It will be noticed that the claims for both ditches and reservoirs claim- 
 ing seepage water began in L892, and that they have, generally speak- 
 ing, increased in both number and capacity since that time. It will 
 be noticed, also, that the seepage ditches and reservoirs are small as 
 compared with the average appropriations from the river. The seep- 
 age ditches average but 10.3 cubic feet per second. Even this is too 
 high, as one ditch alone in 1896 claimed 135 cubic feet per second, an 
 obvious error. Excluding this we have the average claimed capacity 
 of the seepage ditches 5.11 cubic feet per second, as compared with a 
 claimed capacity of 3^.04: cubic feet per second for ditches direct from 
 the river. A like difference exists in the capacities of the two classes 
 
 «The statutes of Colorado expressly prohibit the excessive or wasteful use of 
 water. Session Laws of Colorado, 1895, p. VM . 
 
48 
 
 of reservoirs. The seepage of the district is probably not equal to 
 
 the 25 claims for 132.83 cubic feet per second. 
 
 Seepage measurements on the river show that the return waters arc 
 probably close to 50 cubic feet per second, but much water does not 
 reach the river, being taken up and diverted from the small draws and 
 depressions where it first appears. As will he seen on the map, the 
 seepage ditches, represented by the broken lines, do not head near the 
 river, hut under and near some of the large canals. This water does 
 notappear in the measurement of the river, and its quantity can not 
 be determined. It probably equals the amount which does reach the 
 river, and the two should then equal 100 cubic feet per second. With 
 an average How, as shown heretofore, of 237 cubic feet per second, 
 the seepage water would equal -12 per cent of the flow, and that 
 returning to the river would be 21 per cent. On the Cache la 
 Poudre River the return water, according to the investigations of 
 Professor Carpenter, of the agricultural experiment station, is 30 per 
 cent. Sufficient measurements of seepage have not been made on the 
 Big Thompson to give more than approximate figures, but from data 
 at hand 21 per cent seems at least a conservative estimate. In prac- 
 tice it is found that the Hill and Brush, the Hillsboro, and the Evans 
 Town ditches are supplied largely during the latter part of the season 
 with seepage water. The great value of seepage water is that its 
 greatest flow occurs at the time of least flow in the river and supplies 
 water when most needed. 
 
 In the consolidation of ditches it will always be necessary to main- 
 tain some on the lower river to take advantage of the return water. 
 One large high line ditch on each side of the river with one or more 
 seepage ditches below should be all that is necessary. The only objec- 
 tion to the use of seepage water appears to be that it is often quite 
 strongly impregnated with alkali, and on evaporating leaves alkali 
 deposited on the land. On the Big Thompson there appears to be 
 very little trouble from this, because of the small amount of alkali in 
 the district and because much of it has already leached and passed 
 away. It has been observed that lands ruined by alkali have in time 
 recovered and the alkali has almost entirely disappeared, the water, 
 surface and underflow, passing through the soil Inning carried away 
 most of the surplus. Much of mineral matter that is required by plant 
 growth is contained in alkali, and when not in too great quantities it 
 is a benefit to the soil, so that the leaching done by the surplus water 
 used in irrigating deprives the land in one place of beneficial ingre- 
 dients, which, concentrated and deposited on other land, makes them 
 worthless. There are few spots which in their natural state contain 
 alkali in such quantities as to make it harmful. It is the disturbance 
 of its natural and even distribution through the earth by water and 
 consequent concentration in spots or on the surface that makes it 
 harmful. 
 
49 
 
 Little has as yet been done in district No. I toward the reclamation 
 
 of such lands as has been spoiled by seepage water, though their are 
 seveml places of considerable area, probably 2,000 acres in all. which 
 could be reclaimed with profit. The practice of draining land is of 
 very recent origin in this State and the methods not well developed. 
 The most common method and that giving best results is t<> dig an 
 open trench along the upper edge of the swamped land or near the 
 foot of the first raise of sufficient depth to intercept the inflowing seep- 
 age water; having done this, the water is conducted by open cut or 
 pipe with sufficient fall to give a good velocity to the river or into 
 some ditch where it may he exchanged or used for irrigation in the 
 same manner as reservoir water. The amount of water thus reclaimed 
 is of ten sufficient to pay for the expense of draining. Attempt- to 
 drain land with tiling under the surface and in the wet ground have 
 not been successful. The abundance of land and the cost of tiling 
 would in most cases make this method unprofitable, even if it "were 
 practical. After reclamation this land soon returns to its former con- 
 dition, producing excellent second bottom hay, or, if put into grain, 
 sufficient moisture is present to mature the crops without irrigation. 
 
 ADMINISTRATION AND DISTRIBUTION. 
 
 In the administration of ditches and reservoirs and in the distribu- 
 tion to the consumers there may be said to be two distinct sets of offi- 
 cials, those of ditch or reservoir companies of a private character and 
 those of the State and district of a public character. A ditch or res- 
 ervoir company has a president, secretary, and treasurer, with duties 
 similar to those of any incorporated company. There is a man who 
 patrols the canal and distributes the water to the consumers accord- 
 ing to their proportion of stock or rights in the ditch. He is called 
 the ditch " boss," *' rider," or "superintendent," and acts generally 
 under the direction of the other officers or directors. In most cases 
 it is he who receives orders from the public officers and acts in con- 
 junction with them. 
 
 Various devices and units of measurement are used in distributing 
 the water; the more common, and those used in this district, are the 
 division box for pro rata division and the ordinary culvert placed 
 through the bank of the ditch. Where ditches are small the division 
 box is quite satisfactory. This is a simple flume with level bottom and 
 vertical sides, and of about the same cross section as the ditch. It is 
 divided by a partition running lengthwise of it, the respective widths 
 of the parts being in proportion to the number of share- to be turned 
 out and to the number of shares in the ditch at that point. For 
 instance, if there are 100 shares in all and 20 had been taken out above, 
 leaving so shares in the ditch, and it was desired to turn out 10 shares 
 
 2817— No. 118—02 4 
 
50 
 
 at this point, the box being 8 feel wide, one division would be made 
 7 feel wide, the other 1 foot wide the part flowing into the smaller 
 section being withdrawn from the side while the rest flows on down 
 the ditch. Where the ditch Lb large, if the rider knows the amount 
 of water at his disposal, he can turn out at any point a proportionate 
 amount through the culvert, which is nothing more than a rectanffu- 
 lar wooden pipe Bet through the hank of the ditch. By opening or 
 closing the sliding valve at the end of the box he can regulate the 
 How. A rise or fall in the ditch will alter the quantity, of course, hut 
 the variation is probably not enough to affect the result seriously, and 
 in any case a rise or fall will affect all alike. Where the water i- -old 
 by measure more accurate method- are desired. In such cases an 
 additional measuring flume or weir is placed in the lateral, and the 
 outlet gates are regulated until the proper depth is attained in the 
 flume or over the weir. 
 
 The water in the river is divided among the different ditches in 
 accordance with their priorities by the public officials, who are the 
 water commissioners of the district, appointed by the governor upon 
 recommendation of the hoards of county commissioners of the counties 
 in which they are to serve, the superintendents of irrigation for each 
 division, and the State engineer, also appointed by the governor. 
 
 A water commissioner generally has charge of a single tributary or 
 of a section of the main stream, and it is his duty to visit each ditch 
 whenever it is necessary to regulate the amount of water flowing into 
 it: he reports to the superintendent as often as necessary, stating the 
 volume being carried by each ditch, the volume coming into and going 
 out of his district, and the volume required to till all ditches. The 
 superintendent from these reports knows whether the water is being 
 properly divided among the different districts, and if it is not orders 
 the commissioner of one district to take more water, or less, and speci- 
 fies the volume which should be allowed to pass into the district below, 
 his orders being generally to close all ditches with priorities subse- 
 quent to a certain date. Protests against the actions of the commis- 
 sioner are made to the superintendent, who passes upon the points in 
 dispute. If his determination is unsatisfactory to any one interested, 
 appeal may be taken to the State engineer and from him to the dis- 
 trict court. The commissioners are subject to the orders of the super- 
 intendent, and both to those of the State engineer. 
 
 The commissioners are paid £.5 per day for each day they are on 
 duty, and the superintendent a like sum, his term of service continu- 
 ing a- long a- any commissioner in his division i- at work. In most 
 cases this is for the entire year. In the winter the storing of water 
 and the repair of head gates and placing of rating flumes and weirs are 
 in progress, and the commissioner, besides attending to the dividing 
 of the water for storage, usually gh es directions and advice concerning 
 
51 
 
 the requirements and the best methods of placing the gates and flumes. 
 Superintendents and commissioners arc paid equally by the Beveral 
 counties in which they serve (in some cases as many as ten <>r fifteen 
 counties) and suffer the inconvenience of having their bills audited 
 that number of times. The State engineer receives a yearly salary, 
 paid by the State. 
 
 Besides the duty of distributing and dividing the water, the com- 
 missioner is required to gather. crop statistics and to see that no water 
 
 is wasted; and while he lias no power to settle disputes over the dis- 
 tribution of water which is in the ditches, by mutual agreement he is 
 generally made arbitrator in these family disputes. 
 
 The State 1 engineer occupies a somewhat anomalous position in the 
 irrigation system. While it is true the law places him at the head of 
 affairs, he does not in fact act in that capacity unless some ditch or 
 canal owner, feeling aggrieved at the rulings of a superintendent, 
 appeals to him. In addition, the State engineer is required by law to 
 gather and compile data of rain and snow fall, measure the streams, 
 rate ditches, measure and keep records of reservoirs, examine their 
 dams, supervise their construction or repair, condemn unsafe struc- 
 tures, and give professional advice to other departments of the State 
 administration. 
 
 In this district, most of the ditches being owned by the water users, 
 few written contracts exist, the conduct of the ditch officers being 
 determined by the by-lawsand constitutions adopted by the ditch com- 
 panies. In most cases, whether the flow in the ditch be great or small, 
 the water is distributed pro rata. Often, by agreement, when water 
 is short one section of the ditch will use all the water for a few days, 
 after which it is given to the consumers on the next section. 
 
 The cost of distribution is quite small and is approximately as 
 follows for this district, which is fairly representative of the more 
 important and better settled districts: 
 
 Cost of distribution oftuater, water district No. 4- 
 
 Officials. 
 
 State engineer's office 
 
 Superintendent of irrigation 
 
 Water commissioner.., 
 
 • officers of the ditch companies 1 12 companies). 
 
 Ditch riders (12 ditches) 
 
 Miscellaneous and extra help 
 
 year. 
 
 $100 
 
 100 
 
 1,000 
 2,000 
 5,000 
 1.800 
 
 Total. 
 
 10,000 
 
 Paid by- 
 
 State. 
 Counties. 
 
 Do. 
 Ditch companies. 
 
 Do. 
 
 That is to say, the total cost of distributing the water from the river 
 to the ditches is about $1,200, and from the main canals to the Laterals 
 $8,800, a total of $10,000 per year for perhaps 80,000 acre-, or 12£ 
 cents per acre. 
 
52 
 
 In the management of small ditches the officers act without compen- 
 sation, and the ditch riders receive perhaps $50 per year, the only time 
 w hen tlic\ are on duty being when the ditches are being put in repair. 
 It is seldom that the other officers receive compensation. It is only 
 whin the consumers are not the owner- of the ditch and where the 
 carrying of water i^ expected to return interest on the investment — 
 where, as it is generally stated, water is "sold" by a ditch corporation 
 to the consumer— that the cost of administration and distribution is any 
 considerable item. In that case the manager, secretary, bookkeeper, 
 treasurer, and a regularly employed attorney, as in any corporation. 
 seem to be necessary, and are of course expensive. The cooperative 
 ditch needs no such complicated machinery, and the success of cooper- 
 ative ditches where corporation ditches have failed is largely due to 
 this fact. 
 
 TITLES TO WATER. 
 
 Nearly all questions that come before either the administrative 
 department or before the court- resolve themselves into the rights of 
 the parties and their titles to the water. The title itself depends upon — 
 
 (1) The construction of canal and use of water, and the regularity 
 of procedure in perfecting rights. 
 
 (2) The relation to other appropriators and their rights, including 
 the right of transfer and sale. 
 
 (3) The nature of the grant, when issued, and of the privilege- 
 granted. 
 
 (4) The good faith shown by the grantee. 
 
 (5) His compliance with the provisions of the grant and nonaban- 
 donment of rights. 
 
 These five will include nearly every case in the conflict. 
 
 The right to the use of water for beneficial purpose- was recognized 
 by Territorial laws as early as 1861, and affirmed by Congress in 1866. 
 The constitution of the State, adopted in 1876, declared water to he 
 public property and subject to appropriation. These declarations 
 were deemed necessary, as riparian rights had been upheld in the 
 older States, and might by inference have become attached to 
 Colorado. 
 
 At first water was taken from the river and used without thought 
 of its ever becoming scarce or of there being a conflict for it- posses- 
 sion. The lands then considered farming land- were so limited that 
 there was apparently more water than would ever be used. Even at 
 the time the decrees were granted many still entertained this opinion 
 and did not enter their claims nor examine into the claims of other-. 
 In effect this does not deprive them of the right to water, but in the 
 distribution the water commissioner ignores their claims, thus forcing 
 applications for decrees. Prior to 1871* there was no requirement in 
 
53 
 
 law relative to the filing of claims to water and adjudications of rights, 
 though the necessity of some definite determination of the rights of 
 different claimants had been recognized for sometime prior to thai 
 year. As soon as a scarcity began to be felt the difficulty of dividing 
 the water and the necessity <»i" a (dear statement of each consumer's 
 right forced some action by the legislature, which up to thai time had 
 seemed unable to appreciate the importance of early action or unwill- 
 ing to take the initial steps. There was a belief also that the ditch 
 itself was* evidence of a right; that water having once been used on 
 land thereby becomes appurtenant to it. It was thought that a deed 
 to the land conveyed the right to the water which had been used 
 thereon. A series of years with abundant flow encouraged the irri- 
 gation of a good deal of land, but when these were followed at length 
 by a year of small ilow the necessity of depriving some oik 4 of water 
 forced the establishment of a rule whereby this could be done. In 
 tin 1 early days water was abundant for the land irrigated, and the 
 causes of a short supply were, as stated a slow decrease in the late 
 tlow, from deforestation on the one hand, and on the other a con- 
 stantly growing demand for later water for the rapidly increasing 
 acreage of alfalfa and crops other than grain. The cultivation of 
 great areas of mesa lands, like that begun by the Union Colony at 
 Greeley in 1870, was of course the greatest factor in calling attention 
 to the short supply. 
 
 Op to the time of the passage of the law of 1879 many of the later 
 users contended that the water must be pro rated in accordance with 
 the old law of 1861, amended in 1870. This law provided that the 
 county judge should appoint three commissioners, whose duty it was 
 to "apportion in a just and equitable proportion a certain amount of 
 said water upon certain or alternate weekly days to different Locali- 
 ties." In 1879 the legislature passed the first bill intended to meet 
 the conditions existing. Exclusive jurisdiction was by this law vested 
 in the district court whose territory embraced the water district. 
 "But when the water district extended into more than one county, 
 the court of the county in which tin 4 first regular term after the 1st 
 day of December of each year shall soonest occur shall be the proper 
 court." and such court retained jurisdiction to final settlement. The 
 district judge was required to appoint a referee to take testimony, who 
 should issue a notice stating the time and place where he would hold 
 court, notifying aU interested parties to be present and to submit 
 proofs of claims or present objection- to the claims of others. The 
 referee could call and examine witnesses, and he submitted his find- 
 ings to the court for final adjudication. Those refusing to present 
 their claims were barred as against those submitting proof. Appeal 
 from the decree of the judge could be made within two years, and the 
 court would thereupon order a rehearing. 
 
54 
 
 Little was done under this law. many details of procedure being 
 omitted. In L881, therefore, the act was amended, making further 
 
 77 c 
 
 provisions for settling and recording priorities of right, viz, a pro- 
 vision for petitioning the district court to proceed to an adjudication 
 of rights, for the water commissioner to keep a record of decrees, and 
 
 that the county clerk should record them: also for numbering the 
 decrees, for keeping the testimony where it could be inspected by 
 interested parties, for fixing the method of procedure in cases of 
 appeals to the supreme court, which court could then render a decree, 
 and providing that four years in place of two be allowed in which 
 proceedings may be begun to set aside the decrees. 
 
 The present practice in obtaining title to water is to have the ditch 
 or reservoir surveyed and platted, then either before or after con- 
 struction statements are filed in the offices of the State engineer and 
 county recorder. After completion of the works and after the water 
 has been applied to the land a petition is presented to the district 
 court asking that the rights be defined; after proper notice to all 
 interested parties and due publication, the evidence is taken by the 
 judge or a referee, and decree entered according to the findings. The 
 water commissioner and other officials are notified by the clerk of the 
 court, and a copy of the decree is furnished. Adverse claimants may, 
 within four years, present their protest to the court, and the usual 
 court procedure establishes the contested rights. The following cir- 
 cular, issued by the State engineer's office, gives the forms used at 
 present for filing claims to ditch and reservoir rights, and is in accord- 
 ance with the laws now in force: 
 
 [Circular.] 
 
 State Engineer's Office, Denver, Colo. 
 Instructions for preparing sworn statements and maps in the appropriation of 
 water for ditches, canals, and reservoirs, and for the preparation of plans of specifi- 
 cations for dams. 
 
 RECORDING STATEMENTS OF CLAIMS TO WATER RIGHTS. 
 
 State of Colorado, County of , ss: 
 
 Statement of claim to water right. 
 
 Irrigation division Xo. — . Water district Xo. — . 
 
 The undersigned, , owner — of the following-described ditch, in 
 
 compliance with the requirements of general section Xo. 1720 of the general stat- 
 utes of the State of Colorado, and the amendments thereto, hereby make this 
 
 statement for filing in the proper offices: 
 
 1. The name — of the owner — of the said ditch, , whose post-office 
 
 address is , county of . 
 
 2. The name of the said ditch is the ditch. 
 
 3. The head gate of the said ditch is located on the bank of , from 
 
 which stream said ditch diverts its auppy of water, at a point whence the cor- 
 ner of section , in township , of range west, bears feet. 
 
 From the head gate the said ditch inns in a general direction, as show!! on 
 
55 
 
 the map hereto attached and made a part of this statement; which said map also 
 Bhows the <»\\ nership of the lands over which said ditch passes, and distances of the 
 ditch line from the < rovernment corners. 
 
 I. The length of the said ditch Is miles. 
 
 5. The width of the said ditch is- feel on the bottom and feel ai the 
 
 high-water line. 
 
 6. The depth of said ditch is feel at high-water line. 
 
 7. The grade of said ditch is ■ feet per mile. 
 
 8. The carrying capacity of the said ditch is cubic feel of water per Becond of 
 
 time. 
 
 9. \V«.rk was commenced on the said ditch onthi day of , A. 1). 19—. 
 
 10. The enlargement of said ditch was < imenced on the day of , 
 
 A. D. 19 . 
 
 II. The said ditch, as enlarged, is feel wide on the bottom, feet wide at 
 
 high-water mark, feet deep at high-water mark, and the increased capacity 
 
 arising from such enlargement is cubic feel of water per second of time. 
 
 I Signed. ) 
 Reservoir statements for filing should be as follows: 
 
 State ok Colorado, County of , 8«: 
 
 Statement of claim t<> water right. 
 
 Irrigation division No. — . Water district No. — . 
 
 The undersigned, , owner — of the following-described reservoir, in 
 
 compliance with the requirements of general section x... 1720 of the general statutes 
 of the State oi ( lolorado, and the amendments thereto, do— hereby make this state- 
 ment for tiling in the proper offices: 
 
 1. The name — of the owner — of said reservoir, , whose \ ost-office address 
 
 is , county of . 
 
 •_'. The name of said reservoir is the reservoir. 
 
 3. The said reservoir is situated on the ] of the \, the \ of the \ t 
 
 the 1 of the \, and the \ of tin \ of section , in township , 
 
 of range , in county aforesaid. 
 
 The of said reservoir being at a point when the corner of said section 
 
 hears feet. 
 
 4. The area of said reservoir at the high-water line is acres and at low-water 
 
 line is acres. The depth of water that can be drawn off is ■ feet, making the 
 
 available capacity for storage cubic feet, for which claim is hereby made. 
 
 5. The said reservoir derives its supply of water from the through the 
 
 ditch, thi» head gate of which is located at a point whence the corner section 
 
 , in township , of range , bears , feet. Said ditch has a carry- 
 ing capacity of cubic feet of water per second of time. 
 
 The head gate of the feeder from said ditch to the -aid reservoir is at a point 
 
 whence the corner section , in township , of range , hears , 
 
 feet. 
 
 6. Said feeder is feet wide on the bottom, -feet wide at high-water mark; 
 
 is feet deep, with a grade of feet per mile and a carrying capacity of 
 
 cubic feet of water per second of time. 
 
 7. Work was commenced on said reservoir on the day of , A. D. 19—, and 
 
 on the feeder above described, on the day of , A. I). I' 1 
 
 8. The outlet ditch from said reservoir is feet wide on the bottom, feet 
 
 wide at high-water mark; is feet deep, has a grade of feet per mile and a 
 
 carrying capacity of cubic feet of water per second of time. 
 
 9. Work was commenced on said outlet on the day of , A. D. 19 — . 
 
 (Signed.) 
 
56 
 
 LAWS. 
 
 The water laws of the State bave been discussed heretofore in bul- 
 letins issued by the Department of Agriculture more fully than i» 
 here possible; therefore the briefest outlines and the statement of the 
 
 fundamental principles only which underlie the law and are the basis 
 of our court decisions are given. 
 
 Jn Bulletin No. 58, Office of Experiment Stations, Tinted States 
 Department of Agriculture, issued in L899, the laws were given and 
 discussed at some length, and in Bulletin No. 60, of the ^ame office, 
 issued in L899, the methods and laws governing the acquiring of title 
 to water were published. 
 
 The right of appropriation, as stated, is based upon the Territorial 
 laws, the act of Congress in L866, and the State constitution, which 
 latter declares: "The water of every natural stream not heretofore 
 appropriated is hereby declared to he tin 4 property of the public 
 and is dedicated to the use of the people of the State, subject to 
 appropriation." " 
 
 Theoretically, the fundamental principle of our laws, and one that 
 should he the basis of all irrigation laws, is that the water is the prop- 
 erty of the people, and the right to its use depends upon its being 
 a beneficial application. It does not matter what a person's decree 
 may he. nor what he may have diverted, nor for how many years, nor 
 what his claims may he. he should have no right to water which he 
 does not need and can not use beneficially. 
 
 The next question of importance is whether or not water attache- to 
 the land. The decisions of the court, in the absence of any law on the 
 subject, control in Colorado. Contrary to general belief, the State 
 supreme court held that the water and land were not attached: and 
 this decision was the basis of the greater part of litigation, permitting 
 as it does the transfer of water and enlargement of ditches to the full 
 amount of the decree. 
 
 The right of persons along the borders of a stream to an undimin- 
 ished now has been abrogated in Colorado, and by the decision of the 
 State supreme court ''the common-law doctrine of riparian rights is 
 inapplicable to Colorado." The law abrogating riparian rights is 
 slightly modified, however, by allowing such persons a- have enjoyed 
 the benefits of water from streams for meadow lands by the natural 
 overflow, in case the flow is diminished to such an extent that they 
 are denied the benefits of such overflow, to construct a ditch from the 
 stream to irrigate the meadow; the priority to date from the time when 
 the land was first used as a meadow. 
 
 Priority of appropriation shall give the better right: unappropriated 
 waters are subject to appropriation for canal or reservoir purp 
 and any excess above that needed for direct irrigation may be stored. 
 
 "Constitution. Art. XVI, Bee. 510. 
 
57 
 
 Incorporated companies may obtain decrees and may collect fees as 
 common carriers, and as long as there is water in the canal must per- 
 mit persons under the canal to use the same upon the payment of the 
 carrying charge. This charge may be regulated by the board of 
 county commissioners. 
 
 When water is distributed to users or ditches for a Length of time 
 proportionate to their claims, usually the maximum quantity that can 
 be used economically, the process is known as " prorating." In the 
 distribution of water, while prorating is not -auctioned by law in 
 tilling ditches from the river, it is permissible in distributing to owners 
 in common under one ditch; the point of difference being that in one 
 case the dates of decrees are different, in the other they are identical. 
 
 The right to the use may be transferred from one individual to 
 another, and a d(^^\ to the land does not carry the right to the water 
 unless specifically mentioned. Water may he transferred from one 
 ditch to another and its point of diversion changed up or down the 
 stream. It may be transferred from one drainage to another; it- place 
 and character of use may be changed, providing always that the estab- 
 lished rights of others in tin 1 waters are not interfered with. 
 
 The builders of ditches have the power to condemn a right of way. 
 Ditches are not subject to taxes except when constructed for the pur- 
 pose of deriving a revenue therefrom. 
 
 Domestic uses have no real preference over agricultural except 
 that water used for agricultural purposes may he condemned when 
 necessary for domestic uses. This right of condemnation alone dis- 
 tinguishes them. 
 
 Seepage and waste waters may be appropriated and are governed 
 by the same laws as water from streams. 
 
 The laws passed by the general assemblies of l*w and 1901 are 
 quite important; they are interesting also as pointing out the difficul- 
 ties to be overcome and as showing the effort toward more economical 
 use of water. The laws of 1899 provided that tilings shall be examined 
 by the State engineer and a fee for the same collected. This is a step 
 in the right direction; but the State engineer can not reject the tiling-, 
 he having only power to return them and request a more accurate and 
 complete statement. He does not examine into the merits of the 
 claim that reservoirs covering more than 20 acres or having a dam 
 more than 10 feet high shall be under the control of tin 1 State engi- 
 neer, both during construction and afterwards. He may fix the height 
 to which a reservoir may be tilled at any time. This law provides 
 penalties and methods of procedure against dams deemed unsafe, and 
 upon complaint of three persons the State engineer must examine the 
 dam complained of. The costs of the examination fall on the persons 
 making the complaint if made on insufficient ground— a very wise pro- 
 vision, as it acts as a check on the ill-considered reports people are 30 
 
58 
 
 prone to make; at the same time the law stops the tendency of men in 
 charge to overcrowd the capacity of the reservoir. 
 
 The most important law. however, and the one attracting the most 
 attention during the legislative term of L899 was the one providing 
 for the transfer and exchange of water/' This law is given here in full: 
 
 Sec. 1. Every person desirous of changing the point of diversion of his right t<» nee 
 water from any of the streams of this State shall present his petition to tin- district 
 court from which the original decree issued, praying such changes may 1..- granted 
 
 to him, and the practice and procedure on the hearing of Buch petition shall be the 
 same as if said petition were for an original decree. The court shall require proof 
 that all parties who may be affected by such change have been duly notified of the 
 proceeding; and shall hear evidence to determine whether or not such change will 
 
 injuriously affect the vested rights of others in and to the use of water: and if the said 
 court shall find that such change will not injuriously affect the rights of others, a 
 decree shall be entered allowing said party to make such change. 
 
 Sec. 2. CTpon the granting of such decree as provided for in the first section hereof, 
 the party desirous of making such change shall cause to he prepared two accurate 
 maps showing the old and new ditches, the Burrounding lands, and the lands of 
 other owners in the vicinity, in the same manner a- required in the case of original 
 appropriations of water, and shall rile one of said maps and a certified copy of the 
 decree with the county clerk of the county in which the head gate of the ditch, as 
 Bought to he changed, is situate, and another copy of said map and decree shall be 
 tiled with the State engineer, whereupon said State engineer shall issue a notice to 
 the water commissioner having jurisdiction over said ditch, notifying him of the 
 change made, and thereupon said water commissioner shall allot the priority right 
 t< > the use of water to the new ditch which formerly was allotted to the original ditch, 
 anil shall recognize such change in the distribution of water. 
 
 Sf.c. 3. It shall lie lawful, however, for the owners of ditches and water rights 
 taking water from the same stream to exchange with, and loan to, each other for a 
 limited time the water to which each may be entitled, for the purpose of saving crops 
 or of using the water in a more economical manner: Provided^ That the owner or 
 owners making such loan or exchange shall give notice in writing signed by all the 
 owners participating in said loan or exchange stating that such loan or exchange has 
 been made) and for what length of time the same shall continue, whereupon said 
 water commissioner shall recognize the same in his distribution of water. 
 
 Sec. 4. In the opinion of the general assembly an emergency exists, therefore this 
 act shall take effect and he in force from and after its passage. 
 
 Approved, April 6, 1S99. 
 
 The first two sections of the bill are generally approved, as taking 
 out of the hands of the irrigation officials the power to order a change 
 from one ditch to another, and as rendering any surreptitious change 
 invalid. Of course, the great good accomplished is that it gives notice 
 to all who could he injuriously affected that they have the right to 
 appear and object; and. too. after the order of change has been 
 granted in accordance with law the decree under the change is not 
 Liable to be assailed, and so the title is as good and permanent as 
 though no change had been made. Another good feature is that a 
 map of the old and new ditches and the lands thereunder must he 
 tiled; this filing becomes a valuable document for reference to the 
 
 iwa 18», p. 235. 
 
59 
 
 irrigation officials and to those looking up titles t<» water for lands in 
 that vicinity, and amends in sonic degree the lack of such filings in 
 the early days. The necessity for obtaining a transfer decree before 
 the change is made makes it possible to ascertain many matters of 
 fact, and so affirm or deny statements made foror against the transfer. 
 The question of the capacity of the old ditch is not the least impor- 
 tant of these, affecting the amount which in justice might be trans- 
 ferred. The old ditches could seldom carry their full decrees, and so 
 a measurement on the ground during the existence of the old ditch is 
 certainly necessary. In many of the old transfers, by the time a suit 
 was brought to set it aside or limit it the old ditch had so filled up 
 and changed that its original capacity could not he determined. The 
 determination of seepage water, which contributed to till the old ditch, 
 can likewise he determined accurately only at the time of transfer, 
 and not some years Later. 
 
 The principal objection urged against these sections is that they are 
 too severe in their requirements for notification and entail a consid- 
 erable expense. This is probably true, hut transfers are serious mat- 
 ters, and not to be lightly entered into, but after due consideration, 
 soberly, and in the fear of litigation. There appears no way to secure 
 perfect right of either original decree or of transfer excepting to make 
 all persons who could possibly have a claim on the water parties t<> 
 the suit, and the matter of cost is nothing compared with the feeling 
 of perfect peace engendered by the knowledge of unassailable title. 
 
 It has recently been enunciated by one of the district judge- that 
 the above law simply states a method of procedure which was the only 
 legal way of making a transfer before, and is only in accordance with 
 the law passed in L881 prescribing the procedure for obtaining decrees. 
 It is a great pity that this fact has transpired only after twenty years 
 of costly litigation, and that the above law was necessary to call the 
 attention of the legal profession and of learned judges to these now 
 obvious facts. 
 
 A valid objection against a law which puts obstacles in the way of 
 transfer is that all such changes tend to more economical use of water, 
 or to its application to more productive land, and should be encouraged. 
 Any legitimate transfer has one of these for its object. The abandon- 
 ment of the old bottom lands and the redemption of warm, productive 
 mesas is of benefit to the community as a whole. The application of 
 water to more productive land, producing as it does a greater return, 
 enhances the value of the water, and the more valuable the water the 
 more carefully and economically it is used, and the greater its duty. 
 By transfer several ditches can be consolidated into one; the cost of 
 repairs and maintenance diminished, as well as the loss by seepage and 
 evaporation. This saving by lessening seepage and evaporation is 
 more considerable than appears at first glance, for not only is the 
 
60 
 
 exposed surface diminished, but as 1 ransfers are almost always upstream 
 the waste encountered by traversing a broad, sandy river bed to the 
 lower head gates is eliminated entirely. 
 
 Section 3 of the act quoted above was the most discussed and the 
 most highly praised or bitterly condemned of any law ever passed 
 relative to irrigation, and its praise or blame rested on whether the 
 individual was benefited or conceived himself to have been hurt. 
 That the law in its practical application both benefited and hurt irriga- 
 tion there can be no doubt; but it was in the interpretation of the law 
 by the different commissioners and superintendents that the benefit or 
 harm lay. The section was intended to sanction the exchange and 
 prorating of water in times of emergency and to enable a ditch of late 
 priority to obtain water late in the irrigating season for the preserva- 
 tion of orchards and small fruits and for domestic use. where it would 
 require only throe or four days' run to give the orchards or other 
 crops an irrigation that would probably last them the rest of the sea- 
 son. It was also deemed proper and desirable where a ditch had a 
 small but early priority, not sufficient to reach the end of the ditch on 
 account of loss by seepage and evaporation that it should be permitted 
 to agree with another ditch in similar circumstances to loan its water 
 for a short time to such other ditch, and in return should receive the 
 water of that ditch for a like time, and each could with combined heads 
 force the water to the end of the ditch. 
 
 The law sanctions the exchange of water between ditches and reser- 
 voirs. It is very often impracticable for a ditch company to have its 
 reservoirs so located that the stored water is available for use on its 
 land. If, however, it is allowable for it to give its stored water to a 
 ditch lower on the stream and receive at its head gates water from the 
 river on that ditch's priority, a distinct gain results. Also, reservoir 
 construction is encouraged and no one is injured, as the amount of 
 water diverted at the time of exchange is not increased. 
 
 The commissioners and the superintendent of one division gave the 
 most liberal interpretation to the law. They decided that as the law 
 read "the water commission shall recognize tin 4 same" (notice of 
 agreement of exchange) in his distribution of water, they had no 
 discretion in the matter, and as a consequence transfers were made 
 whenever and however best suited the contracting parties. It is more 
 than suspected that actual sales of water were made by some parties 
 having old priorities. The effect of such a proceeding is readily seen; 
 priorities were practically suspended and decrees nullified; ditch No. 
 1 " loaning" water it could not use to ditch No. 3 deprived ditch No. 2 
 of water which would otherwise have been in the river and available 
 for the filling of decrees. Crops were not only t; saved/' as allowed 
 by the law, but planted, grown, and matured on "borrowed" water. 
 Under so liberal a ruling, the management of a ditch could deprive the 
 
61 
 
 consumers thereunder of water they actually needed. Thej would 
 probably not have the assurance to cause any loss of crops, but they 
 could considerably inconvenience and embarrass the users and sell the 
 surplus to some needy canal. For some unaccountable reason and 
 contrary to all previous practice, ili<' pitches injuriously affected 
 accepted this interpretation and suffered in Spartan silence so tar as 
 appeal for redress to either the Mate engineeror the courts were con- 
 cerned. In another division the superintendent assumed an exactly 
 opposite position, and ordered his commissioners to recognize no notices 
 of transfer. The courts have not been able to pass on tin- const itution- 
 alitv of the act. and it seems that this superintendent was equally in 
 error with the one already mentioned.. The three other superintend- 
 ents who had occasion to pass upon the law agreed that in its workings 
 it was of the greatest benefit in the saving of crops and in the eco- 
 nomical use of water. As no complaints were made of the exchanges 
 in these divisions, we may assume that the user- were pleaded with the 
 section. 
 
 Some law is necessary, so long as human nature is as it is, to enable 
 those in authority to prevent the selfish from playing the "dog in the 
 manger." To he sure, there is a law prohibiting waste, hut it is not 
 to the public interest for a man to use water to irrigate stubble land 
 to bring up wild oats, or to wet the land for the next season's plow- 
 ing when an orchard, the result of years of labor, is in danger of 
 being ruined: and if a man in a neighborly spirit sees lit to abandon 
 his third crop of alfalfa and loan his water for the purpose of saving 
 crops, it is public policy to allow him to do so. The law properly 
 interpreted and executed can he of great benefit and at the same time 
 not interfere with vested rights. If the conditions recited in the sec- 
 tion are adhered to. and if the broad principle of noninterference with 
 the rights of others is kept in mind, no one can object: to get any ben- 
 efit, however, from the law one must he just and reasonable in deter- 
 mining the rights of others. Theoretical and inconsequent damage 
 should not be allowed to prevent the good which might be done. 
 
 The condition specifically stated in the section that the loan is made 
 for the purpose of saving crop- should be rigidly adhered to. The 
 loan is not for the purpose of making crops, but for saving those 
 already practically matured. To he saved an article must necessarily 
 be in existence. As already pointed out. the exchange may result in 
 a great saving of water, and when a loan or exchange i- made, if it is 
 a loan or exchange contemplating a return in like amount, gifts and 
 sales of water are excluded. Again, the loan is for a limited time. 
 This clause is, I admit, indefinite, and might be expressed more clearly 
 
 a The supreme court of the State has recently upheld the constitutionality of the 
 
 art. New Cache la Poudre Irrigating Company u. Water Supply and Storage Com- 
 pany, 08 Pac., 781. — Ed. 
 
62 
 
 by saying for one irrigation; and such an interpretation of "a limited 
 time" is veryproper; anything less would be nothing; any thing more 
 
 would l>e precluded by the clause "for the purpose of saving crops." 
 When more than one irrigation is needed to save a crop, then that 
 crop is not sufficiently advanced to be considered as in existence, or 
 rather to have value sufficient to justify the upsetting of the status of 
 
 the river to save it. 
 
 It would not be wise to repeal the law. as was attempted during the 
 last session of the Legislature, hut it should he so amended as to make 
 it more definite in its phraseology; hut any such law must of neces- 
 sity depend for its beneficial application upon the good judgment of 
 the water officials. 
 
 The laws passed by the legislature of 1901 were, one by Senator 
 Clayton, providing penalties for not maintaining good head gates and 
 rating Humes, the penalty being that the water could be shut out until 
 the law was complied with. It also prohibits the storing of water 
 when the same is required for direct irrigation. This section is hardly 
 applicable as between reservoirs with rights senior to the ditches using 
 the water direct. If the owners of a reservoir of old priority have 
 enjoyed its use for years, it is unreasonable to suppose that a recent 
 diteh can interfere with that use. The act further provides that reser- 
 voirs situated on the bed of a stream through which a natural flow 
 passes must have a survey made and its contour lines run. and must 
 place a gauge rod therein to mark the depth of water in the reservoir. 
 
 The second act provides that any interference with head gates or 
 measuring boxes is a misdemeanor, "and that any person who shall 
 be found using water taken through any such head gate so unlawfully 
 interfered with shall prima facie he deemed guilty." This law makes 
 it possible to convict water thieves without having to catch them in 
 the act of tampering with the head gates. Heretofore convictions 
 have been few, because it was often impossible to prove who individ- 
 ually committed the act of raising the head gate. In its operation it 
 should be a good law. 
 
 The third law provides for the formation of irrigation districts, 
 methods of holding elections, issuing bonds, etc. The law has had no 
 test as yet. and no criticism of its effects, therefore, can be made. 
 
 LITIGATION. 
 
 On the Big Thompson nearly all the litigation has been by parties 
 on the north side of the river against those on the south side. The 
 Loudon and the Loveland and Greeley companies joined interests 
 against the Handy and the Home Supply companies, the other and 
 smaller ditches being drawn into the controversy. 
 
 In the descriptions of the ditches attention has been called to some 
 
63 
 
 Of the peculiarities of the decree's, and in the table below are 8UD1- 
 
 marized the findings and decrees. The wide divergence between the 
 quantities of water granted and the capacities of the canals and need. 
 
 of the land has been responsible for nearly all the litigation. The 
 
 first table is a summary of the report of the referee appointed to take 
 testimony and report findings upon which the court should render its 
 decree. The second table is the decree of the eourt supposedly based 
 
 on the report of the referee. 
 
 Claims jrresented to f</<r>< and his findings <>u which <h<-rt> bythejudg< was rendered. 
 
 Name of ditch 
 
 Width. 
 
 Bottom. Top 
 
 BigThompson.No.la 
 Big Thompson and 
 
 M a n u fact urin g 
 
 Cn.'s Ditch 
 
 Do 
 
 Do 
 
 Do 
 
 Mariano c 
 
 Fanners' Irrigating^ 
 
 Do.d 
 
 Do./ 
 
 Big Thompson Irri- 
 gating/ 
 
 Lovcland and Gree- 
 ley? 
 
 Lovcland and Gree- 
 ley branch* 
 
 bo 
 
 Do.' 
 
 Lovcland and Gree- 
 ley/ 
 
 Lovcland and Gree- 
 ley branch* 
 
 Do./ 
 
 Lovcland and Gree- 
 ley 
 
 Big '1 hompson ami 
 Platte River 
 
 Do.'" 
 
 Rist and Ooss 
 
 Do." 
 
 Hill and Brush 
 
 London 
 
 Do 
 
 George Risto 
 
 Do 
 
 Hillsboro 
 
 Do./' 
 
 Do 
 
 Handy 
 
 I )o 
 
 South Side"/ 
 
 Home Supply I 
 
 Feet. 
 
 10 
 
 6 
 
 s 
 S 
 I 
 
 • 15.1 
 
 ■ IV 1 
 '■15.1 
 
 4. 
 9 
 
 3 
 
 < t; 
 10 
 
 I 
 
 12 
 
 11 
 11 
 
 • 16 
 
 < it;. 
 
 • 18 
 
 Feet. 
 M 
 
 li 
 5 
 
 Length 
 
 15 
 
 18 
 
 is 
 18 
 
 Miles. 
 
 s 
 
 2. 2S 
 1.5 
 
 15 
 
 1.5 
 15 
 15 
 
 15 
 
 3 
 
 2. 75 
 
 3.5 
 3.5 
 
 26. 5 
 
 i 
 1 
 1 
 
 4.7 
 :-;. 7 
 19.5 
 
 2. 3 
 12.3 
 19.3 
 21.5 
 
 21 . 5 
 9 
 
 26 
 
 Depth. 
 
 Feet. 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 2. 5 
 
 2 
 3 
 0. 2 
 
 3. 2 
 
 3.2 
 3.2 
 
 1 
 2 
 2 
 
 2.5 
 
 2.5 
 
 2 
 2. 5 
 
 : 
 
 2. 5 
 
 2. 5 
 
 1.5 
 
 3 
 
 3.5 
 
 3.5 
 
 1.3 
 
 2.7 
 
 3 
 
 2. 6 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 Kail per 
 milt 
 
 No. of 
 
 Amount Am. unit 
 
 Feet. 
 
 7 
 
 25 
 25 
 25 
 25 
 8.92 
 
 10 
 
 '.v.'/ 5 ' decreed.lclaimed, 
 ity. 
 
 6.7 
 6.7 
 
 5 
 5 
 
 2. 1 
 5 
 
 4. 2 
 1.2 
 
 2. 5 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 3.2 
 
 Cu./t. 
 
 P< /• 8< C. 
 
 1 96. 50 
 
 34.20 
 37.10 
 
 65. 17 
 
 9 
 38. 11 
 
 :». 72 
 
 2. (JO 
 
 54.08 
 
 7s 
 
 18.56 
 
 1.5 7 8.36 18.36 
 
 2 13 a 12. GO 
 
 2 17 39.40 39.40 
 
 Ou.ft. 
 
 perseC. 
 96.50 
 
 37. U) 
 
 II. '.Ml 
 
 90.86 
 
 3.12 
 
 :.. 72 
 
 •_'. 86 
 62.40 
 
 l.s.56 
 
 21| 
 
 18 
 
 31 
 
 9 
 
 29 
 
 11 
 18 
 
 • 
 
 21 
 21 
 25 
 in 
 :.l 
 39 
 
 17 
 
 19.92 19.93 
 
 :::>. 50 
 15. 20 
 
 35.50 
 
 15. 20 
 
 Under 
 
 ditch. 
 
 Acres. 
 2,640 
 
 920 
 1,320 
 
 2. isti 
 
 2,180 
 
 Irriga- 
 ted. 
 
 Acres. 
 
 2,500 
 
 400 
 1,000 
 1,600 
 1,500 
 
 120 
 2, 100 
 2,100 
 2,100 
 
 1,000 
 
 4,300 
 4,300 
 4,300 
 
 1,000 
 
 3,600 
 
 3,250 250 
 
 690 690 
 
 690 690 
 
 3,600 
 
 1,400 
 2, 100 
 
 35 
 
 st',. is 
 6. 11 
 
 st i. (17 
 
 61.80 
 
 40 
 
 154.30 
 195 
 195 
 
 '.•-.». l". 
 
 15. 69 
 
 31.20 
 
 141.23 
 
 27-. s | 
 
 35 
 
 86.18 
 10.50 
 80.07 
 
 10 
 158.80 
 
 195 
 
 195 
 
 inn 
 ■526" 
 
 " I'V" 
 
 3,000 
 3,000 
 
 too 
 
 inn 
 1,600 
 
 1:;. in.; 
 
 1.;. in;; 
 3,500 
 3,500 
 300 
 6.000 
 6,000 
 
 in. 000 
 
 ]IMMH. 
 
 1,500 
 15,000 
 
 560 
 
 1, ino 
 1,800 
 
 297. 11 528 30.000 1.000 
 
 1,500 
 2,000 
 
 1 . 
 
 225 
 
 1,500 
 
 100 
 2, lint 
 
 300 
 1,800 
 3,000 
 1,000 
 7,000 
 
 600 
 1 1 . 521 ' 
 
 n 0.026 cubic fool L inch. 
 
 bFoll capacity. 
 
 '■Not sufficient data to render a decree. 
 
 d All in one application. 
 e Average width. 
 /Capacity 103 cubic feet. 
 g Barnes Ditch. 
 
 >'7.s feet recommended by referee. 
 '12.6 recommended by referee— branch Lovcland 
 and Greeley. 
 
 /Barnes Ditch. 
 
 A17.3 recommended by referee. 
 /9. 1 cubic feel recommended by referee, 
 m Capacity 78 cubic feet. 
 " Amount carried 1. 7 cubic feet. 
 "Am. .nut carried 121 cubic feet. 
 /'Amount carried 71 feet. 
 •i Amount carried 15. 6 feet. 
 
C>4 
 
 Statement of prioritt 
 
 )f ih, ditches ni null r district No. i from the <i< <■,■<<* of tin district 
 
 court. 
 
 Name 
 
 ►f ditch, ci 
 reservoir. 
 
 Streams from 
 which water is 
 
 taken. 
 
 Hit,' Thompson Ditch 
 
 Big Thompson ami Manu- 
 facturing Co.'s Ditch. 
 
 Mariano Ditch 
 
 Big Thompson ami Manu- 
 facturing Co.'s Ditch, 
 first enlargement. 
 
 Farmers' [rrigating Canal . 
 
 Big Thompson Irrigating 
 Ditch. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal (branch |. 
 
 Big Thompson and l'lattc 
 River Ditch. 
 
 Kist and Ooss Ditch 
 
 Hill and Brush Ditch 
 
 Date of appro- 
 priation. 
 
 Big Thompson .. Nov. 10, 1861 
 do \pr. 1,1863 
 
 ..do.. 
 ..do.. 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 .do 
 
 May 1,1863 
 May 1,1864 
 
 do 
 
 Feb. 25, 1865 
 
 Oct. 20,1865 
 
 Nov. J. 1st,;, 
 
 Nov. 18,1865 
 
 Mar. 20.1866 
 
 Big Thompson and Manu- 
 facturing Co.' sl>i tch, sec- 
 ond enlargement. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal, first enlargement. 
 
 Farmers' [rrigating Canal, 
 first enlargement. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal, second enlargement. 
 
 Loudon Irrigating Canal .. 
 
 Big Thompson and Manu- 
 facturing Co.'s Ditch, 
 third enlargement 
 
 George Rist Ditch 
 
 Loveland ami Greeley Ca- 
 nal, third enlargement. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal, fourth enlargement. 
 
 Kirchner Ditch 
 
 Perkins Ditch 
 
 IIillsln.ro Ditch 
 
 Kist and Gosa Ditch 
 
 Big Thompson and Platte 
 River Ditch, first enlarge- 
 ment. 
 
 Loudon Irrigating Canal, 
 lirst enlargement. 
 
 Handy Ditch 
 
 Hillsboro Ditch, first en- 
 largement. 
 
 Farmers Irrigating Canal, 
 second enlargement. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal, tilth enlargement. 
 
 South Side Ditch 
 
 Handy Ditch, first enlarge- 
 ment. 
 
 Loveland and Greeley Ca- 
 nal, sixth enlargement. 
 
 Perkins Ditch, second en- 
 largement 
 
 Home Supply Ditch 
 
 Hillsboro Ditch second en- 
 largement. 
 
 Loudon Irrigating Canal, 
 second enlargement. 
 
 do I unc 30, L866 
 
 do Mar. 1,1867 
 
 .do 
 
 do... 
 
 do... 
 
 Buckhom Creek. 
 ....do 
 
 Big Thompson... 
 
 do 
 
 ....do 
 
 .do 
 
 do 
 
 do 
 
 .do 
 .do 
 
 do.... 
 
 Buckhom 
 
 Big Thompson.. 
 
 do 
 
 ....do 
 
 net. 25,1873 
 
 June 1,1874 
 June 15,1874 
 Oct. 15,1874 
 Apr. 15,1875 
 May 15,1876 
 
 Nov. 1,187* 
 
 Feb. 28, 
 Apr. 15, 
 
 Aug. 
 Nov. 
 
 Nov. 7. 
 Dec. 15, 
 
 Apr. 1, 
 June 9, 
 
 July 15, 
 
 Oct. (i, 
 
 Sept. it. 1883 
 
 Amount 
 decreed. 
 
 sum de- 
 creed to 
 each 
 
 ditch, 
 canal, or 
 resei voir. 
 
 Cu.ft. 
 pt r sec. 
 96.50 
 34. 02 
 
 3.12 
 37.01 
 
 78 
 
 18.56 
 
 8.36 
 
 35 
 
 6.41 
 61.80 
 65. 17 
 
 June 1,1861 
 
 .do June 1, 1868 
 
 .do Oct. 20,1870 
 
 . Oct. 1,1871 
 . May 1,1872 
 
 .do May 1,1873 
 
 .do June 23.1873 
 
 l^Ts 
 1878 
 
 1878 
 
 1878 
 
 1880 
 1880 
 
 1881 
 L881 
 
 1881 
 L881 
 
 6.81 
 
 2.60 
 
 8. 25 
 
 80.07 
 
 86.18 
 
 154.; 
 
 31.20 
 99. 16 
 
 54.08 
 
 15. 20 
 
 50. 30 
 141.23 
 
 297. 1 1 
 
 4. 17 
 
 278. 8 I 
 1.-.. 69 
 
 123. 18 
 
 Cii.JI. 
 
 P< r » c. 
 
 "1.03 
 
 136. 50 
 
 317.78 
 
 Water 
 
 previ- 
 
 12.06 38.98 
 
 2.60 8.32 
 
 39.04 78.02 
 
 40 
 
 146. 25 
 
 195 
 19. 93 
 
 35. 50 133. 45 
 
 86. is 
 121.18 
 
 194.30 
 
 107.71 
 
 62. in 
 
 1 18. 65 
 
 172. 13 
 4 16. i 9 
 
 propri- 
 ated in 
 district. 
 
 in dis- 
 trict. 
 
 <ii.ft. 
 P' /• » C. 
 3.12 
 99. 62 
 
 1 
 2 
 
 133.64 
 136.76 
 
 3 
 4 
 
 17;;. 77 
 179. 19 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 257. 19 
 
 7 
 
 276. 05 
 
 8 
 
 284. 11 
 
 9 
 
 819. 11 
 332.06 
 393. 86 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 13 
 
 17-.-:; 
 
 15 
 
 192.06 
 
 17 
 
 526.17 
 
 21 
 
 565. 21 
 608.67 
 
 22 
 
 24 
 
 618.42 
 
 813. 42 
 
 25 
 26 
 
 833.35 
 
 27 
 
 904.65 
 
 1,048.95 
 
 28 
 29 
 30 
 33 
 37 
 
 1,190.25 
 
 40 
 
 1,344.55 
 1 , 375. 75 
 
 41 
 42 
 
 1. 175.21 
 
 43 
 
 1 , 529. 29 
 
 44 
 
 1,586.28 
 1,636.58 
 
 49 
 50 
 
 1,777.81 
 
 51 
 
 2,075.25 
 
 52 
 
 2,079.72 
 
 53 
 54 
 
 2, 104.25 
 
 55 
 
 NOTE.— The rights to water from Little Thompson Creek, which were included in the original 
 decree, arc omitted in this table, 
 
65 
 
 Stab nn nt of pri 
 
 f reservoirs in ivater district Xo. 
 court. 
 
 front tin <i< en • ■-■ of tl" district 
 
 Nam.- of resen oir. 
 
 Stream from which water i- 
 taken. 
 
 : appn 
 prlation. 
 
 Amount <»f 
 appropria- 
 
 Order of 
 priority 
 in dis- 
 trict. 
 
 Risl 
 
 Mariano . . 
 
 Bennetts. . 
 Big Thomp 
 Farwell... 
 
 Big Thompson Sept. 15,1874 
 
 do Oct 1,1875 
 
 st. \' rain and Little Thompson Feb. 25,1880 
 
 n Big Thompson May 18,1881 
 
 <!<> Vug. 31,1881 
 
 Feb. 24,1883 
 
 Luii«l<»n do 
 
 Cubic feet 
 
 fH ;' St mini. 
 
 5,211 
 180, » 
 1,267,800 
 14,001 
 
 H0.00ii.ikmi 
 
 10, 
 
 Examination will show there was apparently no rule adopted by the 
 judge or referee for estimating the amount of water the ditches car- 
 ried or the amount of water necessary to irrigate an acre of land. 
 The judge has in some cases followed the referee's recommendation and 
 in other- ignored it. The referee, in turn, generally accepted as cor- 
 rect the statements of the claimants, but in others he did not. though 
 there appears to be no reason for the distinctions. In some cases he 
 allowed an amount sufficient to irrigate all the land under the ditch; 
 in others he confined the amount to the land actually irrigated. In 
 some he allowed water for land which by an extension and enlarge- 
 ment of the ditch might be irrigated. h\ one case at least he allowed 
 water to only the land actually irrigated, ignoring the fact that the 
 ditch for nearly its entire length could carry a yolume sufficient for 
 all the land under it. that work was rapidly prosecuted, and that this 
 land was irrigated at the earliest practicable date. In this case he did 
 not take into consideration the extent and difficulty of construction, 
 but diyided the decree into several parts, each of date when water was 
 actually applied without reference to the time of beginning construc- 
 tion. In another case, contrary to the statements made in the applica- 
 tion and request for two decrees of different dates, he granted one 
 decree aggregating in amount the total of the two and of date of the 
 older. 
 
 FIRST SERIES OF CONTESTS. 
 
 The Handy Ditch, intended and located to cover nearly all the land 
 on the south side, is by the decree granted a flow of 31.2 cubic feet 
 per second to irrigate 15,000 acres of land. The priority of the bal- 
 ance, 141.23 cubic feet per second, was dated three year- later, as the 
 company had not been able to begin and complete a ditch capable of 
 carrying the total amount through its entire proposed length the first 
 year after work was begun. This action allowed 260 cubic feet per 
 second for various ditches and enlargements to intervene between the 
 two priorities. 
 
 The officers of the Handy Ditch, ignorant that the referee had taken 
 it upon himself to divide their decree without notice to them, and, 
 2817— No. 118—02 5 
 
 
66 
 
 being unaffected thereby on account of tin- abundance of water in the 
 river and the small amount withdrawn by the older priorities, allowed 
 nearly the full four years within which an appeal from the decree 
 could be made to lapse. The decree was granted May 28, l s ^». and 
 not until the fall of L886 did the water commissioner find it necessary 
 to turn water from the Bandy Ditch to till decree- between the two 
 date- <>f the decrees of the Handy Ditch. Investigation disclosed the 
 true state of things, and suit was immediately brought by the Handy 
 Company to set aside the decree-: brought, however, in the district 
 court of Larimer County. Thus in its effort to save its right, the 
 Handy Company precipitated, in the spring of L887, a legal contest 
 not yet ended. The case was entitled "The Loudon Irrigation and 
 Canal Co. et al. v. The Handy Ditch Co. et al." (22 Colo., p. 102.) 
 
 The suit was originally brought in the district court of Larimer 
 County and in eti'ect was an attempt to set aside the decrees for the 
 entire district. The Handy Company, believing that the decree- of 
 the older ditches were excessive and that they were entitled to have 
 their entire decree of one date — the date of the beginning of construc- 
 tion — instead of two dates, sought relief by the above action. 
 
 The defendants (The Loudon et al.) denied the jurisdiction of the 
 Larimer County court and alleged insufficient cause of action, which 
 latter contention the court upheld, but claimed jurisdiction. Upon 
 appeal to the supreme court, that tribunal reversed the lower court 
 in the matter of jurisdiction, sustaining the law of 187i». section 19, 
 which gave exclusive jurisdiction to the court where the decrees were 
 first rendered, which in the case of district No. -i was the Boulder 
 County district court. The case does not touch the point whether one 
 district can reopen the decrees of another district after four years have 
 elapsed. It simply says that any action growing out of the decrees 
 must be tried before the court which rendered the decrees and within 
 four year- of the date of such decrees. 
 
 The effect of the decision is to establish more firmly the validity of 
 a decree. If at any time after four year- an adjudication could be opened 
 up, and especially if before another court, the adjudication would be 
 of slight avail, and title to water could not be finally and firmly settled. 
 When it is remembered that months and years of labor have been 
 spent in arriving at a decision, it would be folly to allow the work to 
 be a subject of question for all time. It would be eminently proper 
 to allow a certain time to elapse to test the practical workings of the 
 decrees before making them unassailable; but. very properly, there 
 should come a time when decrees are established beyond the possibility 
 of question. 
 
 Upon being remanded, some new points were brought out. and so 
 the case reached the supreme court a second time under the title of 
 ••The Handy Ditch Co. /•. The South Side Ditch Co. et. al." (26 Colo., 
 p. 333.) 
 
67 
 
 En this second triaU before the Larimer County court the Handy 
 Company still contended thai thai courl had jurisdiction and showed 
 that, acting under the law of l s 7'.». proceedings were begun in that 
 court by the appointment of a referee and the taking of considerable 
 evidence prior to the institution of proceedings under the law of L881 
 by tin 1 Boulder County court. On this point, however, tin- Larimer 
 County court held, in view of the decision of the supreme courl in the 
 previous case, that the Handy Company, being a party to the ] >n>< •<•«■. I- 
 ings before the courl of Boulder County and having acquiesced in 
 the same, were bound by it< decrees. 'The supreme court affirmed the 
 decision of the lower court, and the four years having elapsed within 
 which to begin proceedings before the Boulder court, this phase of the 
 case ended. 
 
 SECOND SERIES OF CONTESTS. 
 
 In the meantime, however, the Handy Company, anticipating the 
 adverse decision, sought to remedy their misfortune by taking advan- 
 tage of the condition of the decrees and to turn to their benefit what 
 had been an injustice to them. They therefore purchased, an old ditch 
 and the land under it. abandoned the irrigation of the land, and sought 
 to transfer the water. This proceeding inaugurated the second series 
 of contests, the interests of the contestants, however, being the reverse 
 of that in the first series. It now became vital for the Handy Com- 
 pany to uphold and maintain the justice and validity of the decrees 
 and for the north side ditches practically to break and set aside the 
 decree-. 
 
 The Handy Company, in view of the court decisions in the first 
 cases, had rather the better of the situation, while its adversaries were 
 in something of a dilemma from this cause. They, however, avoided 
 the real issue by admitting the correctness and validity of thedecrees, 
 but contended that immediately after and ever since the decree was 
 issued the use of the water had been abandoned in whole or in part: 
 that the area irrigated was small, and on account of increasing seepage 
 had constantly grown less since the time of the decree. Much evidence 
 was introduced by both sides to -how the amount of water required 
 for such lands. The evidence introduced by the Handy Company was 
 very similar to that given before the referee when the decrees were 
 rendered, not only in regard to the ditch in question, but for the very 
 ditches constituting the opposition. 
 
 The evidence of the opposition was in direct and glaring contrast to 
 that given by them in obtaining decrees, and the only reason it did not 
 react on themselves was that sine* 1 the adjudication they had so enlarged 
 their canals and so extended the use of the water that the full amount 
 decreed was in time used. On the other hand, there was no enlarge- 
 ment or extended use of the ditch in question. 
 
68 
 
 The case coming on appeal by both the defendants and plaintiffs to the 
 supreme court is known a- "The Handy Ditch Co. y. The Loudon Irri- 
 gating Canal Co." (62 Pacific Reporter). The facts in the case were. 
 The Handy Ditch Company purchased the Big Thompson Irrigating 
 
 Ditch and the lands under it, some 800 acres, abandoned the latter, and 
 applied to the superintendent of irrigation to transfer the water to the 
 
 Handy Ditch some L0 miles above the head gate of the old ditch. The 
 amount of the decree was 78 cubic feel per second, dated February 25, 
 L865, being the fifth decree in the district, and commonly known as 
 •• No. 5 ditch." The superintendent allowed but 40 cubic feet per sec- 
 ond to be transferred, as he contended that the old ditch could not carry 
 much more than one-half of its decree. On appeal to the State engi- 
 neer he caused the ditch to he measured and levels run. from which 
 the estimated capacity was shown to be from 100 to 150 cubic feet per 
 second. He therefore ordered the full amount to be transferred. In 
 the meantime, however, the north-side ditches had brought suit, as 
 stated, in the Larimer County court, which court held that the evi- 
 dence showed that not more than 20 of the 7^ cubic feet per second 
 had been used of late years. It excluded evidence which tended to 
 show that much or all of the 20 cubic feet per second used was seepage 
 and return water which entered the river between the old and new 
 points of diversion, upholding- the argument of the Handy Company 
 that the decree was not for water which might, at some date subse- 
 quent to the date of the decree, have found its way back to the river, 
 but for that which constituted part of the original supply in the stream. 
 
 In its appeal to the supreme court the Handy Company urged that 
 the finding was in error, in that the evidence did not warrant the 
 reduction from 78 to 20 cubic feet per second, and that the court erred 
 in not admitting evidence as to the size and capacity of the ditch. The 
 defendants appealed on the ground that evidence was excluded which 
 would have shown that whatever water had been used by "No. 5 " 
 ditch was water which entered the river as seepage below the head gate 
 of the Handy Ditch, and if any water was transferred that it would be 
 withdrawn from the original supply in the stream, and the use of which 
 they theretofore had enjoyed. 
 
 The supreme court affirmed the decision of the lower court so far 
 as it related to the amount of water used by the "No. 5*' ditch, but 
 remanded the case w ith instructions that if a new trial was had it should 
 embrace only the question of whether the 20 feet found to have been 
 used by *' No. 5" ditch was in whole or in part seepage water and not 
 available for the tilling of decrees of the Loudon or other older ditches. 
 
 The decision of the supreme court will probably stand, namely, that 
 20 of the 78 cubic feet decreed to the "No. 5" ditch will be transferred 
 to the Handy. With the final determination of this suit the litigation 
 will end, though in the district court at present are some six suits in 
 
69 
 
 which the north Bide ditches are seeking to preveul the transfer of 
 water from the Big Thompson Ditch and Manufacturing Company's 
 Ditch and the Big Thompson No. 1 ditch to the I tandy, I Ionic Supply, 
 and rlillsboro ditches. 
 
 The suits are simply a continuation of the efforts of the south-side 
 ditches to overcome the disastrous effects of the decrees which gave 
 excessive amounts to the old ditches, allowing enlargement and in- 
 creased use to an extent which has seriously affected the water avail- 
 able to till their priorities. 
 
 OTHER LITIGATION. 
 
 NEW LOVELAND AND GBEELE1 I.AM) AND [RRIGATION COMPANY V. HOME 
 
 SUPPLY COMPANY. 
 
 [i)L ) Pacific Reporter.] 
 
 Both parties to this suit own large and valuable reservoirs under 
 their respective canals — Lake Loveland under the Loveland and Gree- 
 ley (anal and the Mariano and Lone Tree reservoirs under the Home 
 Supply. The action was brought in the district court of Boulder 
 County to establish the relative right of priority of these reservoirs. 
 
 The Loveland and Greeley Ditch priorities as decreed are prior to 
 those of the Home Supply. The relative dates of construction of the 
 reservoirs, however, are reversed, the Home Supply reservoirs being 
 in Inn:? and 1889 and the Loveland Lake in 1893, each exercising clue 
 diligence after commencement of work on the reservoirs in prosecut- 
 ing the same to completion. 
 
 The Loveland and Greeley Company claimed the right under it- 
 ditch decree to divert the amount of its decree at any time and for any 
 purpose which was more effective or economical; that is. to have the 
 right to store water during the nonirrigating season on its ditch decree, 
 the reservoir being a part of its system and its construction contem- 
 plated at the time the several priorities were obtained, though it did 
 not begin construction for some ten years after the decree was ren- 
 dered fixing the ditch priority and some twenty-eight years after the 
 date of its first priority. 
 
 The Home Supply Company claimed that its reservoirs were con- 
 structed and in operation ten and four years prior to the construction 
 of Lake Loveland: that the right of storage attaches when the actual 
 work of construction of the reservoir is begun and prosecuted with 
 due diligence, and not when the feeder to the reservoir was begun, 
 unless the two are closely connected in point of time, in intention and 
 actual construction. 
 
 The court held that the mere intention is of itself insufficient to give 
 a vested right, but must be manifested by the completion of the gen- 
 eral plan and a beneficial use within a reasonable time. 
 
70 
 
 The Loveland and Greeley Company relied, however, mainly on its 
 decree fixing the priority of right for agricultural purposes, which 
 "fairly interpreted" would give it the righl to store water in reser- 
 voirs it might thereafter construct. The courl says, "There are two 
 sufficient replies to this contention. First, il was not within the juris- 
 diction of the court in the proceedings leading up to the decree to 
 make an absolute and unconditional decree of priority for a reservoir 
 not then begun or constructed, and in the second place the decree 
 itself does not purport to do so." but expressly excludes appliances 
 not then in existence. In such cases as this it would seem unjust that 
 a late ditch which had provided itself with the means of supplying its 
 deficient early rights should, after the enjoyment of that means for a 
 number of years, be subject to an old priority seeking to enlarge its 
 diversion of water from the stream by means of storage. 
 
 I.OWKR LATHAM DITCH COMPANY /'. LOUDON IRRIGATING CANAL COM- 
 PANY ET AL. 
 
 [Pacific Reporter 60, p. 629.] 
 
 This suit was to test the relative rights of priority in two districts 
 dependent on each other: Whether ditches in district No. 4. from the 
 Big Thompson River, were or should be subject to the rights of prior 
 appropriation below on the Platte River in district Xo. 2. 
 
 The users on the Big Thompson obtained an injunction restraining 
 the water commissioner from complying with the order of his superior, 
 the superintendent, to close out ditches on the Big Thompson in order 
 to supply such priorities on the Platte River as were earlier than those 
 on the Big Thompson. The water commissioner notified the plaintiffs 
 of the action and forwarded to them his notifications, etc., expecting 
 them to defend their rights. They, however, allowed the case to go 
 by default, but subsequently brought the present action to compel a 
 recognition of their older rights. 
 
 The defendants pleaded that while the plaintiffs were not parties to 
 the injunction suit, nevertheless they had notice, and so were bound by 
 the decree. Also that for a number of years the ditches on the Big- 
 Thompson had used the water now asked for by the ditches on the 
 Platte, who, with a knowledge of this, had nevertheless allowed the 
 practice to continue without protest, permitting improvements to be 
 made in district No. -i under the belief that there was water in suffi- 
 cient quantity and not subject to the priorities below, and though in 
 need of the water to fill their priorities the ditches of district No. 2 
 had allowed their rights to lapse. They set forth also that even should 
 the water be turned out of the Big Thompson ditches to fill those of 
 the Platte, it would do so slowly and after great loss in volume. 
 
 The district court of Larimer County sustained these positions, which, 
 
71 
 
 however, the supreme court reversed, holding that the plaintiffs were 
 not parties to the injunction suit, though having knowledge of the 
 same, and thai " if a failure of one diverting watei from a stream to 
 protest every time a shortage in his supply is occasioned by another 
 withdrawing water to which he is not entitled is to be construed as 
 acquiescence amounting to abandonment priorities would be of little 
 value." Also the fact that a considerable loss in volume would occur 
 through evaporation and percolation was not sufficient reason for 
 depriving the lower ditches of their rights of priority. 
 
 This case confirms the practice and belief that rights on tributaries 
 and on the main stream, though in different districts of the same divi- 
 sion, are subject to prior rights pi all other ditches of the division. 
 
 COMMENTS. 
 
 Ln looking over the water conditions in Colorado, examining the 
 causes of the legal contests and difficulties of administration, no one 
 thing seems to be entirely responsible, each succeeding cause or error 
 depending on what had preceded and on what followed to produce the 
 full measure of difficulties. Each mistake seemingly had a chance of 
 correction, but, instead of a correction, only additional errors were 
 made. 
 
 First, the absence of records, filings of statements in the early days 
 was a had beginning, second, the laws of 1879 and 1881 relative to 
 decrees fell short of their intention to supply the deficiency in records; 
 third, the adjudication of water rights failed to eliminate the errors 
 made possible by the incompleteness of the laws of 1879 and L881 and 
 added others; fourth, subsequent litigation perpetuated and exagger- 
 ated these errors. 
 
 The law relative to filings passed in 1881 has a few faults — namely, 
 that it came almost twenty years too late to do much good, and there 
 is no provision for an official examination and acceptance of the filing-. 
 and that the courts have held it to be unconstitutional in that non- 
 compliance therewith can not deprive an appropriator of his constitu- 
 tional right to the use of water. 
 
 Filings are of little value except as evidence of time when the claim 
 was made and of intention. Filed in the county recorder's office, they 
 are not indexed with reference to the land covered, and nowhere 
 appear in the abstracts of the land. There is no method in use for 
 abstracting water rights, and it is impossible to determine who the 
 owners are or to what land the water is applied. This looseness of 
 the record of ownership of decrees, as well as undecreed ditches, ha- 
 led to much litigation. Not only is the irrigator constantly threatened 
 by the dangers incident to water supply and control, but is sur- 
 rounded by an atmosphere of doubt as to the exact status of his title 
 and the rights upon which the success or failure of his efforts depend. 
 
72 
 
 There being no official examination and acceptance of these claims 
 
 filed, what is the result of the uncontrolled and indiscriminate riling 4 
 District No. 4 has suffered little from filings as compared with other 
 districts since adjudications were had. On page 47 is a summary of the 
 filings made since 1887, which shows claim for nearly three times the 
 average flow of the stream for ditches alone, and for reservoirs of 
 nearly 7,500,000,000 cubic feet — more than the entire flow in the river 
 for an average year. In addition to this, it must be remembered that 
 the amount of water actually decreed to ditches only by the courts 
 (see table of decrees, page 64), and which are prior to these claim-, is 
 nearly 200 cubic feet per second in excess of the maximum recorded 
 flow of the river during the last twelve years and exceeds the average 
 recorded flow for the month of June by 1,657 cubic feet per second. 
 Now, add to this reservoir decrees to the extent of 15,000 acre-feet. 
 This tendency to make excessive filings and claims was encouraged by 
 the condition of the decrees, they being, as indicated, far in excess of 
 the amount available, while, in point of fact, after the old ditches were 
 filled there remained in the stream and subject to appropriation con- 
 siderable unused water. 
 
 It was very unwise in the beginning not to have some control and 
 restriction of these filings. One man files on "all the surplus and 
 unappropriated water" without doing an}' work other than a rough 
 survey, and, too, after the waters have been filed on to ten times the 
 discharge of the stream. Another files on "50,000 cubic feet per 
 second," when the stream, in its wildest moments of storm, melting 
 snow, and cloudburst, never carried one-tenth that amount; and there 
 those absurd " filings" stand like specters, intimidating bona fide set- 
 tlers and legitimate corporate enterprise and casting doubt upon the 
 title to water of existing ditches. 
 
 The law of 1881 was intended to determine the rights to water of 
 different claimants and to fix those rights; to bring to a stop, as it 
 were, the old order of things and to start a new, with the past definitely 
 settled and the future controlled. The records to this time depended 
 on the memory of the "oldest inhabitant," who was passing away. 
 The difficulties of a just determination were great, but their impor- 
 tance was greater, though hardly appreciated by either the claimants 
 or the courts. Each appropriator presented his claim, and his neigh- 
 bors and friends corroborated his statements. Almost never was any- 
 one's claim questioned or examined by others interested. The only 
 question gone into with any thoroughness was the date of priority; 
 the size, length, capacity, and location were mere statements. The 
 acreage to be irrigated, while generally given, was guessed at. as was 
 the amount necessary to an acre. The location of the canal and the 
 ownership were in no more definite form. Especially noticeable was 
 the absence of any State control or any effort on the part of the State 
 to protect the interests of those who were to come after. A "cubic 
 
73 
 
 foot of water per second" had do meaning to -nine; others maintained 
 thai L2 "inches " a was afoot: others still thai L 4.4 or 1,728 was cor- 
 rect. It would appear from the results thai the majority favored the 
 12 inches to a foot idea, resulting in decrees three times what was 
 intended. 
 
 It is strange that the judge or referee, who presumably knew of the 
 conflict of opinion and of the wide range of statements relative to w hat 
 was necessary to irrigate an acre of land and what constituted an 
 '•inch." did not avail himself of the services of a competent engineer, 
 who would report on each ditch, classify the land under each, estimate 
 the acreage, measure the canal, and ascertain its capacity and the 
 amount it probably used. The expense would have been much less 
 than the witness fees or the time value of the gratuitous witnesses. 
 
 Had we at that time bad a State engineer who, without bias or prej- 
 udice, employing the same methods of measurements and standards 
 of classification, was authorized to make reports, the judge would have 
 had reliable, uniform data on which to base his decrees; instead of 
 such information he relied on the statements of interested parties, who 
 were ignorant alike of standards or methods of measurement. During 
 the last year a man who has been irrigating for at least thirty years 
 demanded in all seriousness and good faith 2,000 inches of water for a 
 320-acre farm. About 200 inches were turned into his ditch and he 
 reported that he was getting his 2,000 inches all right. He is a type 
 of the witnesses testifying before the referee — honest and with the 
 best of intentions. The result of all this was, naturally, excessive 
 decrees and indefinite and conflicting terms, as in the decree previously 
 given. The peculiarities of the decrees in district No. -I- have been 
 discussed, but all the above reasons and those previously mentioned 
 do not explain, nor can they excuse all the mistakes made. No man. 
 no matter how good a judge or attorney, is competent to render 
 decrees unless he has had practical experience in the handling and dis- 
 tribution of water, and for this reason it seems necessary either to 
 remove the settling of priorities from the judiciary or to supply them 
 with such expert aid as is necessary. 
 
 A board consisting of men trained in the service who recognize its 
 needs, the difficulties and dangers likely to arise, and who can and will 
 make examination on the ground to settle disputed facts, seems far 
 superior to a judge who has had at most little practical experience with 
 water, who is accustomed to handling civil cases with rules of pro- 
 cedure scarcely applicable to irrigation cases, and who in the press of 
 other work can not take the time necessary to become personally 
 familiar with the case on the ground as well as in the court room. To 
 
 r ' In Colorado an "inch" is the volume which will pass through an orifice 1 inch 
 square under a pressure of 5 inches, measured from the top of an orifice, and varies 
 somewhat with the number of "inches" sought to be measured; 38.4 inches is the 
 accepted equivalent of a cubic foot per second, however. 
 
 2817— No. 118—02 6 
 
74 
 
 goon adding reasons for such a change, in view of the condition of the 
 decrees already rendered by the courts, is entirely unnecessary. If 
 the customs and laws are so firmly grounded as to preclude the possi- 
 bility of the change indicated, a law requiring the State engineer to 
 examine and make report on the ditches of a district before decrees 
 arc <ntered would meet most requirements. In the old districts, how- 
 ever, where the decrees have become fixed, the State engineer should 
 be required to examine each ditch, reservoir, and decree, and upon his 
 report to the district judge, after proper hearing, excess decrees should 
 be declared abandoned. 
 
 Enlargement is productive of more evil than transfers. Transfers 
 are open, subject to examination and question. Enlargement is a slow, 
 insiduous, intangible process of taking more and more water from the 
 river and of depriving later appropriators of benefits which the}' have 
 before enjoyed. The simple process of cleaning a ditch, if well and 
 thoroughly done, may be made in a few years to double the capacity. 
 An examination and record of the present ditch capacities would pre- 
 vent much of this and declared abandonment, resulting in practically 
 a new set of decrees, would stop it altogether. 
 
 The decrees all contain one element so indefinite that one is at a loss 
 how at this time to apply a remedy, though in future decrees this 
 might be more specifically stated — that is the time element. A decree 
 purports to establish the maximum amount of water that can be 
 diverted at any time. It is left to conjecture, however, for what length 
 of time the water is so run. Under the conditions existing at the 
 time appropriations were made for the early ditches, and extending 
 even to the time of the decree, the water was used quite differently 
 from what it is at present. The crops were all early maturing and 
 required little late water. Now, however, both early and late crops 
 are raised, the result being that instead of having little use for water 
 after July it is now demanded for August and September as well. 
 Formerly water was run on the land perhaps one week in the month; 
 now with larger ditches, larger and more diversified crops, it is run 
 every day in the month. This, then, is an increase in the length of 
 the season and of use from an intermittent to a continuous flow, with 
 the result of a largely increased acreage irrigated and actual volume 
 diverted though the number of cubic feet per second may be no 
 greater. 
 
 This enlarged use is made possible by the segregation of the land 
 and water under the rulings of courts and brings up a consideration of 
 the fourth item in the summary on page 64. 
 
 Numerous cases have been tried in the State in which the right to 
 transfer water has been confirmed. With the conditions of excess 
 decrees, it is to be expected that the excess, when water becomes val- 
 uable, will, if possible, be used. The water becomes an article of sale 
 and purchase, and, while as stated in the section on laws, transfer, 
 
extension, and enlargement are benefits t<> the community as a whole, 
 confiscation of the property of the indn idual results for the benefit in 
 particular of the holders of an <>1<1 decree and of the community in 
 general. With decrees more definite as to length of time and use and 
 limited in quantity to the Deeds of the land irrigated, transfers would 
 be a benefit as they would encourage consolidation of ditches and 
 economy of use. Conditional decree- could he granted dependent on 
 the completion of extensive works and the actual reclamation of the 
 land within a reasonable period. 
 
 In the administration of the irrigation department, one must con- 
 tend with the acts of those who believe themselves to have been 
 wronged and who by force seek to maintain their rights, but discre- 
 tionary power of the officers has been so curtailed and limited that 
 they are often forced to do things against both their judgment and 
 inclination. Every irrigation official should be clothed with more dis- 
 cretionary power, and the decisions of tin 4 State engineer should stand 
 until the courts deeide adversely, instead of being overruled by injunc- 
 tion. An official who is sworn and under bonds to do his duty is 
 enjoined from doing this duty. The presumption of impartiality is as 
 strong in him as in a judge; his ability to judge of a case is superior; 
 he is familiar with the law and customs; he knows, by long exercise 
 of his duties, the priorities, the needs, and the rights of the ditches; 
 he knows almost by instinct the effect of certain actions and decisions; 
 he has knowledge which neither laws nor decree-, nor books, nor rec- 
 ords can give; he has seen the effects actually worked out on the 
 ground; he is vitally interested in the good conduct of his office, and 
 he is subject to immediate removal in consequence <>t' any misconduct. 
 It is simply absurd that the court should presume without investiga- 
 tion, and in ex parte proceedings to set aside his ruling-. 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 In the foregoing pages, as far as possible, facts as ascertained from 
 personal observation have been given, and criticism of doubtful 
 points has been avoided. An attempt has been made to give an out- 
 line and something of a history and the sequence of events which led 
 up to the legal contests, said by some to be only the beginning, but 
 which are more probably the beginning of the end. Other nation- have 
 had nearly the same questions and difficulties to meet, and found the 
 solution of their troubles and worked out their own salvation. With 
 them it required centuries for final settlement. In the United States 
 the progress made in Colorado in one short generation gives no reason 
 for discouragement. An efficient system of administration has been 
 worked out. and a system of adjudication ha- been adopted, which 
 needs only a better knowledge of the requirements of irrigation prac- 
 tice to make it satisfactory. 
 
 O 
 
ImSSSIZ 0F FLORIDA 
 
 3 1262 08927 8997