94 



vohime used on a farm may increase with a change in the nature of 

 the crops raised, as in Colorado, but this increase is small when com- 

 pared with that which takes place when both the area and the use 

 increase. It is, however, just as truly a dei:>arture from the principle 

 of beneficial use and the hardship to the holder of the later rights is 

 less in degree only. 



It is in connection with this increased use that transfers of water 

 rights have been most objectionable. In many cases ditch owners 

 who received decrees for more than they had used or needed to use, 

 or more than their ditches could carry, sold the surplus to which, 

 under the principle of beneficial use, they had no right. They con- 

 tinued to use as much as ever, Avhile whatever was used by the pur- 

 chasers of their surplus rights was taken from the holders of later 

 rights. However, this can not be charged against transfers, as such, 

 since if the rights had never been recognized they could not be 

 transferred. 



As to the effect of differences in the nature of the water-right sys- 

 tems of the three States on the just division of the water of the 

 Platte River between the States, the preceding pages show that phys- 

 ical conditions are such that there will be little occasion for con- 

 troversy as to the division of the water of the North Platte between 

 Colorado and Wyoming and that water rights in Wyoming and 

 Nebraska are based on similar laws. The nature of the rights will 

 not therefore affect the just distribution of the water of the North 

 Platte between Wyoming and Nebraska. Although in general rights 

 in Colorado and Wyoming differ in their nature, the Colorado decrees 

 defining rights to water from Laramie River are exceptions to the 

 rule and base rights on the needs of given areas of land, making 

 them similar to rights to water from the same stream in Wyoming. 



The rights to water from the South Platte in Colorado are to 

 definite volumes of water based very largely on liberal estimates of 

 ditch capacities rather than on the volumes of water which had been 

 used at the time the rights were adjudicated. Rights in Nebraska 

 entitle their holders to sufficient water for given areas with the limit 

 of 1 cubic foot per second to 70 acres. It is pointed out in the enu- 

 meration of the rights to water from the South Platte that in both 

 Colorado and Nebraska rights very largely in excess of what had 

 been used or the stream supplied at the time the rights were adjudi- 

 cated have been recognized. Since these rights in Colorado are for 

 definite quantities of water, as time goes on the tendency Avill be for 

 the use to increase up to the full volumes decreed, and for this water 

 to be spread over larger areas as economy in use takes place. On the 

 other hand, rights in Nebraska being based on the need of particular 

 pieces of land, the volumes used Avill be limited to those needs, which 

 will tend to diminish as the time that the land has been irrigated 



