88 



known there were no commonly accepted rules as to the limits of the 

 rights of appropriators. Uncertainty as to these points has led to 

 litigation, which ha:: been the greatest burden on the water users of 

 the West. 



Various attempts, none of them successful, to provide for records 

 of appropriations have been made. The most common is a require- 

 ment that the party desiring to appropriate water must post a notice 

 of the intended appropriation at the proposed point of diversion and 

 file a copy of this notice with some public official, the notice to state 

 fully the intentions of the claimant. Colorado now has such a law, 

 and Wyoming and Nebraska have had them in the past. Their weak- 

 ness lies in the fact that there is no limit on what may be claimed, 

 and no public inspection of the work done to see that the water 

 claimed has been diverted and used. As a result there are hundreds 

 of claims on file with no record whatever to show whether the 

 appropriations were ever completed. The records are, therefore, 

 valueless as showing what rights exist, and they do not, of course, 

 show anything as to the nature or limitations of rights. It is possi- 

 ble to enact laAvs defining exactly the nature of rights and providing 

 for inspection of claims filed and works built and the recording of 

 the results of such inspection, which, if properly enforced, might do 

 away with the evils which have so far attended the acquiring of 

 rights by appropriati(m, but the experiment has never been tried. 



Wyoming and Nebraska have, however, gone further than the 

 course suggested and adopted what amounts to a system of license, 

 although the word " appropriation " is still retained in their laws. Un- 

 der these laws the intending water user must make application to the 

 State engineer, stating what his plans are, and before construction 

 may begin this application must be approved, and it may be rejected 

 if its approval is contrary to the public interests. The approved 

 applications state the time within which the works must be completed, 

 and the laws provide for the submission of proof of completion and 

 for inspection of the works by public officials. After such proof and 

 inspection, certificates are issued defining exactly the rights which 

 have been acquired. The Wyoming law was enacted in 1890 and 

 the Nebraska law in 1895, and there has been little litigation regard- 

 ing rights initiated since these laws went into effect. 



TRANSFERS OF WATER RIGHTS. 



Colorado has provided by law for transfers, with the restriction 

 that others shall not be injured. The board of control in Wyoming 

 has uniformly held that transfers could not be made, but has been 

 overruled by the supreme court of the State," while the Nebraska 



a Johnston v. Little Horse Creek Irrigation Company, 79 Pac, 22. See p. 83. 



