74 



North Platte and along the ditches below that city were interviewed, 

 and none of them seemed to feel that diversions in the upper States 

 diminished their snpply of water. The general sentiment seemed to 

 be that an increased use of water in Wyoming and along the upper 

 valley in Nebraska would improve rather than injure the supply 

 for the ditches below. The supply for these ditches has always been 

 short in the late summer and could not be much worse. Their own- 

 ers, therefore, look with favor upon the enlarged use of water above 

 in flood season in the hope that the return seepage will maintain the 

 flow below in the late summer. 



From the above discussion it will be seen that there is little likeli- 

 hood of any interstate conflicts on the North Platte unless it should 

 be between ditches heading close together immediately above and 

 below the State line. At present the Mitchell ditch heads just above 

 the State line in Wyoming and carries water for use in Nebraska. 

 The owners of this ditch have neither made an application nor filed 

 a claim in either State. The Farmers' Canal and the (xering ditch 

 head just below the State line, and surveys are being made for canals 

 to head in the section above the State line. Contests have arisen 

 between the Mitchell ditch and the other ditches, but the Mitchell 

 ditch has so far been beyond control, since the Wyoming officials 

 had no reason to close it to satisfy Nebraska ditches, and the Nebraska 

 officials had no authority to close head gates in Wyoming. Some 

 provision must in the future be made for controlling these head 

 gates. Wyoming ditches above this point have no reason to complain, 

 since they get the first chance at the water. All complaints will, 

 therefore, come from Nebraska ditch owners, and the question is 

 how to protect rights acquired in Nebraska against diversions in 

 Wyoming. 



It will be recalled that, regarding the South Platte, the conclusion 

 was reached that the only probable conflicts would be between ditches 

 immediately above and below the Colorado-Nebraska line. 



INTERSTATE QUESTIONS. 



The relations between rights on the same stream in adjoining 

 States, or rather the interdependence of those rights, are not well 

 defined. There is no legislation on this subject, either State or 

 national, and few court decisions. In the State courts of Colorado 

 but one decision even approaching this question has been rendered, 

 and in that one decision » the court merely held that under the Colo- 

 rado statute providing for the adjudication of water rights the dis- 

 trict court w^as not authorized to determine rights to water to be 

 diverted in Colorado for use in New Mexico. One of the ditches 



ttLamson v. Vailes, 27 Colo., 201. 



