404 HEPORT or OFl'ICK OF KXPKIU.MKNT STATIONS. 



statoniont showing Iho njiin(> of Iho stroani, the vokimc of water to be 

 diverted, tlie j)()in( of diversion, the |)ro|)os('(l use and the place of 

 use, and the name of the appropriatoi'. On receipt of thi.s a|)pHcation 

 (he ( lerk is to record it and emj)h)v some comj)etent ci\ il engineer to 

 measure tlie ditch and locate the exact j)oint of diversion and report 

 tlies(> witliin thirty days witii a plat on which shall he shown the [)oint 

 of diversion, the date of the notice of appropriation, the date of the 

 survey, the name of the stream, the name of the appropriator, the 

 puri)ose and phice of intended use, and if Un- irrigation, the location 

 and area of Lmd to be irrigated. On receipt of this report, the clerk 

 is to pubhsh notice once a week for three weeks in some newspaper, 

 giving the facts. Any party interested may file objections. After 

 publication, the clerk is to file the report and all objections raised, 

 and on the first day of the next sessif)n of the court present them to 

 the court. If no objections have been filed, the court shall enter an 

 order allowing the appropriation. If objections are filed, the court 

 is to fix a date for a hearing, and, after the hearing, the court is to 

 make whatever order seems proper. Under this law, when a stream 

 has once been adjudicated, rights to water from it will be defined as 

 acquired, maintaining the list of rights complete. 



The principal point of difference in the laws requiring the securing 

 of permits from the state engineers is in the degree of discretion 

 allowed the engineer in approving applications. The state engineer 

 of Wyoming is required to reject an application "where there is no 

 unappropriated water in the proposed source of supply, or where the 

 proposed use conflicts with existing rights, or threatens to prove 

 detrimental to the public interests." Some of the other States have 

 followed this, while others allow the engineer to reject applications 

 where there is no unappropriated water or the proposed use would 

 conflict with existing rights, while others — notably Idalio — provide 

 that "it shall be the duty of the state engineer to approve all appli- 

 cations made in proper form which contemplate the application of 

 the water to beneficial use." (Laws of 1903, p. 226.) 



Utah included the Wyoming provision in its law of 1903 but 

 amended it in 1905, taking away from the engineer the power to 

 reject applications because of hostility to the public interests. Of 

 the new laws enacted since 1905 all provide for the rejection of 

 applications the approval of which would be detrimental to the 

 public interests. New Mexico and South Dakota place this power 

 in the engineer, while in Oregon the engineer is to report such cases 

 to the board of control, which is to decide therein. The only instance 

 coming to the writer's notice in which an aj^plication was refused by 

 a state engineer on the ground of conflict with the public interests 

 was in Utah. That case was appealed to the court, wliere the engi- 

 neer was overruled and this power denied to him, although the law 



