OCR Text |
Show reservoirs on the tributaries of the Arkansas Ln Colorado (Coler Ditch and Reservoir). This condition resulted in Colorado,in her sovereign capacity, filing suit in the Supreme Court of the United States in 1929 against the State of Kansas for the purpose of requiring the latter State to enforce up- on its water users the provisions of the former Supreme Court decree, and to quiet further litigation by her agents against appropriators in Colorado* The Supreme Court of the United States assumed jurisdiction of the subject; matter and permitted Colorado to file an original suit against the State of Kansas. In its answer, Kansas filed a cross bill of complaint against Colo- rado in which* among other things, Kansas alleged increased depletion of tshe flow of the river, since the original case had been decided, and also its rip;ht to one-half of the undepleted flow of the river at the Colorado-Kansas State line. Voluminous testimony* covering a period of nearly ten years, has been taken in this second suit before a stenographic commissioner* ap- pointed by the Court. In the meantime, the representatives of the two States entered into a stipulation to maintain the status quo of the use of the waters of the Ar- kansas River pending: (a) The construction of a large storage and flood-con- trol reservoir, which is known as the Caddoa Reservoir3 to be locr.ted on -the Arkansas River about J4O miles west of the Colorado-Kansas State line and which has been approved for construction by the United States Corps of En- gineers in the Omnibus Flood Control Act of 1936j or (b), until the present suit has been decided by the Court. The status quo provided by the stipulation is described as permitting Colorado to continue to divert substantially 160,000 acre-feet of water per year for the irrigation of 72,000 acres of land below the Caddoa Reservoir in Colorado, and that Colorado will not deplete the flow at the interstate line below 25,000 acre-feet, in order to permit storage in reservoirs in western Kansas between October 1 and April 1, and not below 5.2*000 acre- feet for direct application in Kansas between April 1 and October 1; that when the Caddoa Reservoir has been constructed, both States will share equally in the surplus water which the reservoir will capture and make avail- able under the administration, of the two State Engineers. The stipulation is without prejudice to the claims of either party, as set out in the pend- ing interstate suit, and is subject to the, decision of the Supreme Court of the United States as to the respective rights of the States to the water furnished by the Arkansas River*"* or stored in the proposed reservoir.. Th.e stipulation provides that its terms shall not be filed in the present action between the States until the construction of said dam and reservoir by thie United States Government has been assured. The two States agreed to co- operate in obtaining the construction of the Caddoa Dam. In this connec- tion, the Legislature of Colorado created the Caddoa Reservoir and Arkan- sas River Basin Conservancy and Improvement District to enable the water uses to meet any obligations imposed by the Federal Government in connec- tion with the construction of the Caddoa Dam. Laramie River Suit - This case& involved the use of the waters of tine Laramle River which rise in Colorado and flow into Wyoming. The Government of the State of Wyoming alleged that a proposed diversion, by means of a tunnel from the Laramie River to the Cache la Poudre River in Colorado, -93- |