35 



obeyed l)y those in cliaroie of the work, except that they may appeal 

 to the State engineer, whose decision is final. The expense of this 

 supervision is to be paid by the applicant. The engineer may cancel 

 the permit if his orders are not complied with. The practice under 

 this act has been for the builders of a reservoir to employ an engineer 

 who is satisfactory to the State engineer, and only the most general 

 supervision is exercised by the latter. 



All proposals to reclaim land under the Care}' Act are submitted to 

 the State engineer, who examines them and determines — 



Whether or not the proposed works are feasible; whether the proposed diversion of the 

 pubHe waters of the State will prove beneficial to the public interest; whether there is suffi- 

 cient unappropriated water in the source of supply, and whether or not a permit to divert 

 and appropriate water through the proposed works has been approved by him; whether the 

 capacity of the proposed works is adequate to reclaim the land described; whether or not 

 the proposed cost of construction is reasonable, and whether or not the maps filed in his 

 office comply with the requirements of said office and the regulat ions of the Department of 

 the Interior; also whether or not the lands proposed to be irrigated are desert in character 

 and such as may be properly set apart under the provisions of the aforesaid act of Congress 

 and the rules and regulations of the Department of the Interior thereunder. Whenever the 

 State engineer shall be unable, from an examination of the maps and field notes submitted 

 for his examination, to determine whether or not the proposed irrigation works are feasible 

 and adequate, whether or not the proposed cost of construction is reasonable, or whether 

 or not the proposed diversion of the public water is beneficial to public interest, and whether 

 or not the lands proposed to be irrigated are of such a character as to come under the pro- 

 visions of the aforesaid act of Congress, the board may direct the engineer to make or cause 

 to be made by some qualified assistant such survey or examination as will enable him to 

 report intelligently thereon to the board. 



In addition the applicants must secure from the engineer a permit to 

 appropriate water in the regular way. Under this act 556,593.39 

 acres have been segregated, and about 50,000 acres patented. 



Parties wishing to float or drive logs in any of the streams of the 

 State must apply to the State engineer for permission to do so, and 

 must, if required by the engineer, give bond in a sum to be fixed by the 

 engineer for the protection of irrigation ditches and property along the 

 stream. 



The board of control has uniformly held that water rights should be 

 and are attached to the land in connection wdth which they are 

 acquired, but in practice the board has sometimes departed from the 

 rule. Where the original land has been ruined the old certificate has 

 been recalled and a new one issued describing the land to which the 

 right is transferred, bearing the date of the original certificate, and an 

 explanation of the change made. In 1904 the supreme court of the 

 State overruled the board of control in this matter and held that 

 rights can be transferred if others are not injured'^ by the change. 

 One of the chief objections to transfers has been that they destroyed 

 the value of the record of the State engineer's office as a guide for the 



o Johnston v. Little Horse Creek Irrig. Co., 79 Pac., 22. 



