32 



Consistently witji this, anyone deeming himself injured ])y any act 

 of a water comniissioner may ap])eal to the superintendent, from him 

 to the State engineer, and from the engineer to the district court. 



The distribution of water has alwa^^s been hampered by the exist- 

 ence of unadjudicated rights. The water commissioner has no guide 

 in such cases, yet the rights are unquestioned although undefined. 

 In many cases the liolders of these rights refused to recognize the 

 autliority of the commissioner and also refused to submit testimony 

 in adjudications. However, this was remedied so far as adjudicated 

 streams are concerned by the law of 1901, compelling such parties to 

 submit their rights to the board of control, on penalty of forfeiture. 

 On unadjudicated streams there is still this trouble. 



Another phase of this same question was settled by an opinion of 

 the attorney-general in 1901. That was the status of rights under 

 permits, for which certificates had not been issued. Complaints 

 were made by the holders of such rights that they were being inter- 

 fered with by subsequent but adjudicated rights. The opinion of the 

 attorney-general on this point was that the commissioners should 

 deliver water in the order of the dates of permits, provided the ditches 

 were ready to receive it, the permits being as binding on the State 

 as certificates. (Rpt. St. Eng., 1901-2, p. 51.) 



The general instructions to the water commissioners are to get the 

 largest possible service out of the water supplv, but that priorities 

 must be enforced when demanded, even if the supplying of 1 cubic 

 foot per second at the head of an early ditch requires the loss of 10 

 cubic feet per second in the sand of the channel. 



Commissioners were formerly to begin work on the call of two or 

 more persons having rights to water, but it frequently happened that 

 one person whose rights were being interfered with could not secure 

 the signature of a second person to his call for the services of the com- 

 missioner. The law was therefore amended in 1901, authorizing the 

 commissioner to begin work on the call of one appropriator, if the 

 commissioner deems it sufficiently important. 



Appropriators are required to maintain head gates and measuring 

 devices to the satisfaction of the superintendent of the division, and 

 standard plans have been sent out by the State engineer. The orig- 

 inal law requiring these structures provided that in case of neglect to 

 put them in after thirty da3^s' notice from the superintendent, that 

 officer was to report the matter to the count}^ commissioners, who 

 were to put in the structures at the expense of the county and assess 

 the cost against the land in case the appropriator refused to pa^^ it. 

 Under this law a party could delay action for a whole season, and 

 county commissioners might even then refuse to act, rendering it 

 impossible to secure the putting in of the structures. On the recom- 

 mendation of the engineer this law was amended in 1901, providing 



