OCR Text |
Show Fort Creek belonging to the Alpine Irrigation is in excess of the need of West Field Ditch u& ers. Carlisle Ditch users have been permitted to exceed the 3 cfs to a ditch capacity of 6 cfs." Second, " users of West Field Ditch may transfer shares from West Field Ditch to Carlisle Ditch to protect Carlisle Ditch crops or whenever water is not needed in the West Field Farms." In 1963 the Alpine Irrigation Company made two applications to appropriate water from wells. Both were for 6 sec. ft. for irrigation from April 1 to October 30. On behalf of the Alpine Irrigation Company, the Utah State Board of Water Resources applied to change the point of diversion for the Alpine right as evidenced by diligence claims on water used prior to 1903. As required, the application was advertised publicly from May 7 to May 21, 1970. It was protested by a number of shareholders of the company on the grounds that secondary holders would benefit at the cost of the primary holders; however, the method of allocation is clearly established by the bylawys of the company. The State Engineer approved the application, reiterating that it is not the province of the State Engineer to interfere with the internal organizations of bylaws of individual irrigation companies nor to regulate the distribution of water once it has been diverted from the natural channel or source to the company. ( Section 73- 3- 14, Utah Code Annotated, 1953) Testimonies of witnesses involved with the Alpine Irrigation Company add interesting insights into the development of the company. In a sworn affidavit of April 21, 1960, Albert J. Adams who was born in Alpine, Utah, July 7, 1868, recalls: " at first there were no turns, each user would take a stream as needed and keep it as long as wanted or until some one else took it, but in later years it was necessary to take turns." He added that, as time went on, people began quarreling over the water. Another witness, Evan Shepherd, who moved to Alpine in 1932 stated on April 21,1960, that a board of directors was chosen by voting according to shares. The board then chose a watermaster. He noted that it was the practice to divide water betweeen the North Bench, Lehi Irrigation, and Alpine Irrigation companies to the letter. Any trading was done only through mutual agreement, and there was no share trading between ditches, although trading was permitted within the limits of a ditch. The records of the Alpine Irrigation Company were relatively brief and simple as compared with those of other companies. In some areas, legal disputes resulted in decreased rights. Furthermore, due to the size of operations of the various companies changes in diversions, appropriations, or arrangements for waters of additional streams, add complexity to the task of sorting out the water rights held by each company. Finally, applications for changes may still be pending. ~ 79 |