OCR Text |
Show waters of the North Platte River. In the brief, the petition makes two dis- tinct claims with reference to North Platte River water. (1) Federal ownership of all the waters of the North Platte River (sub- ject to vested rights), under the reserve powers of the Federal Government (this of course includes all unappropriated water); and* (2) Federal ownership of such water as has been acquired under State laws and in conformity with Section 8 of the Reclamation Act* It is inconceivable that both contentions can be mainteined in the pend- ing suit, and it is believed that the United States will have to elect "which ^ horse it will ride." In the ruling earlier in this case,^7 on Wyoming's motion to dismiss on the ground that the Secretary of the Interior had not been made a party de- fendant, although a holder of appropriations from the North Platte River, the United States Supreme Court had said, "The motion asserts that the Secretary of the Interior is an indispen- sable party. The bill alleges, and we know as a matter of law* that the Secretary and his agents, acting by authority of the Reclamation Act and supplementary legislation, must obtain permits and priorities for the use of water from the State of Wyoming in -the same manner as a private appropriator or an irrigation district formed under the state law« His rights can rise no higher than those of Wyoming, and an adjudication of the defendants' rights will necessarily bind him. Wyoming will stand in judgment for him as for any other appropriator in that state* He is not a necessary party." Since the Court declined to allow individuals as appropriators to in-ter- vene in that suit and had also declined to allow individuals as appropria-tors to intervene as parties defendant in the pending Colorado vs. Kansas suit in that Court, it would- seem that the United States has no greater standing as an appropriator or party in interstate litigation. Answers to the petition were filed by Nebraska and Wyoming on July II4, 1938* and by Colorado on August 299 the Court having extended the date for filing to September 1» Suit over Return Waters from the North Platte Government Project on the North Platte River Between Khalen Dam and Bridgeport, Nebraska* - In Febru- ary, 1938* the Attorney General of the United States filed ^suit in the Federal District Court in the North Platte Division, claiming all the return flow from the lands of the North Platte Government Project, consisting of aboixt 225*000 acres, served by the Interstate, North Port, and Fort Laramie Carxals, of which about 200,000 acres are now irrigated. The suit is recorded as "United States vs. Tilley, Willis, and the Fanners Irrigation District."^ The Farmers Irrigation District is a mutual organization in Nebraska, whi-ch owns and operates the Tri-state Canal, diverting water from the North Pl©.tte River just below the Wyoming-Nebraska State line. This District was mad© a party to the proceeding for the reason that it has a Warren Act contract ^United States vs» Tilley, Willis, and the Farmers Irrigation Distirict; in the U» S« District Court of Nebraska (not yet reported)* -103- |