OCR Text |
Show 674 INTERSTATE ADJUDICATIONS flowing from one of them to another that it has to streams wholly within one of them. The remaining questions are largely matters of fact. The evidence is voluminous, some of it highly technical and some quite conflicting. It has all been considered. The reasonable limits of an opinion do not admit of its extended discussion. We must be content to give our conclusions on the main question's and make such references to and comment on what is evidential as will point to the grounds on which the conclusions on those questions rest. As to minor questions we can only state the ultimate facts as we find them from the evidence. The question first in order, and the one most difficult of solution, relates to the flow of the Laramie River, the common source of supply. The difficulty arises chiefly out of the fact that the flow varies greatly in the course of the year and also from year to year. Colorado's evidence, which for convenience we take up first, is directed to showing the average yearly flow of all years in a consider- able period, as if that constituted a proper measure of the available supply. We think it is not a proper measure-and this because of the great variation in the flow. To be available in a practical sense the supply must be fairly continuous and dependable. No doubt the natural flow can be materially conserved and equalized by means of storage reservoirs, but this has its limitations, both financial and physical. The construction of reservoirs of real capacity is attended with great expense, and unless an adequate return reasonably can be foreseen the expenditure is not justified and will not be made. The years of high water and those of low do not alternate. Often several of the same kind follow in succession. The evaporation of stored water in Colorado and Wyoming is from five to six feet per year. So, while it generally is practical to store water in one part of the year for use in another, or in one year for use in the next, it often, if not generally, is impracticable to store it for longer periods. All this is recognized else- where in Colorado's evidence. One of her principal witnesses said: "With regard to financial practicability of construction of reservoirs on Poudre River capable of conserving extraordinary floods, will state that they call for an expenditure that could be utilized only occa- sionally. It would be similar to financial proposition of people in Florida preparing to heat their houses in the same manner as those in the northern part of the United States. For years of unusually high flow in the Poudre River, conservation works, to utilize the excess waters in that stream, would have to count on carrying water over more than one year. The utilization of this water means the presence of population on the land; that population must have a living from year to year and they are not justified in going out on the land and settling to raise a crop only once in three or four years. They must have sufficient to make a living from one year to another, and consequently the investment must be such that there can be sufficient waiter every year to keep these people on the land, and when water can only be conserved once in every three to five years, there must be provision for carrying over water or the people cannot live. It is a question of population as well as investment. The population has to exist and stay on the ground. From standpoint of investment, conservation of flow such as extreme flow of 1884 would be impractical to the extent that it |