86 



THE I IRRIGATION AGE. 



MAKE YOUR ORCHARD A GAME BIRD PRESERVE 



C RANKLIN A. DE VOS, editor of the Omak 

 _ (Wash.) Chronicle, in the Yakima country, is 

 a friend of the birds. And after investigation he 

 has found the friendship of the birds is something 

 worth having, particularly if one owns an orchard. 



"The local project a wild bird game preserve ! 

 How would that strike you, Mr. Orchardist?" says 

 Mr. De Vos in a recent issue of his paper. 



"Have you ever taken the trouble to investi- 

 gate the true value of having a domesticated flock 

 of game birds living in your orchard? Leave out 

 the beauty and novelty of the situation, which are 

 both fine, and get the facts about the dollars and 

 cents value of these little wild friends of yours. 



"You will never find a- more careful or steady 

 fruit tree inspector than a bunch of quail, prairie 

 chickens or pheasants will prove to be. They are 

 the natural enemy of all the bug and worm pests 

 your trees are heir to, and it is their business to 

 get all of them because it is a large part of their 

 living. They are on the job about fourteen hours a 



day and would cost you but a few cents apiece each 

 year. 



"This may sound fishy to some folks, but we 

 know of a fourteen-acre bearing orchard in the 

 northern part of this county that has really never 

 been given a thorough spraying in its life because 

 the owner has been a friend of an ever increasing 

 flock of wild birds. This man could easily figure 

 up in dollars and cents a magnificent profit for these 

 little feathered friends of his. Fruit tree inspectors 

 say that this orchard is one of the best and cleanest 

 in the county and the owner has a standing offer 

 to eat, worm and all, any worm infested apple that 

 can be found on the ranch. He sold nearly three 

 carloads of fruit this year and has eaten nothing 

 but good fruit so far. 



"Who will agitate this preserve idea and help 

 to get the birds to making their homes in local 

 orchards? Get a flock of tree inspectors of your 

 own and see that they are cared for and protected 

 anyhow." 



WIPES OUT STATE LINES IN WATER RIGHTS 



STATE boundaries have no bearings on water 

 rights and the state has no special claim on 

 the water of the rivers which spring up within its 

 boundaries, according to a decision rendered re- 

 cently by United States District Judge R. E. Lewis 

 in Denver. The decision involves practically all 

 irrigation projects in Colorado and has a wide bear- 

 ing on similar cases in all other irrigation states. 



The decision was given in the case of the 

 Pioneer Irrigation Company of Nebraska against 

 John E. Field, state engineer, his assistants and 

 all users of water from the Republican river in 

 Colorado. 



The plaintiffs claim priorities on the river ante- 

 dating many of those held by Colorado irrigators, 

 who have been taking water from the stream be- 

 fore it passes out of the state. 



The court decreed that the Colorado users 

 must leave twenty-nine feet of water in the river 

 where it crosses into Nebraska. 



"Should the Supreme court of the United 

 States uphold this decision," Attorney General 

 Farrar, of Colorado, who has been active in the 

 case, said, "it will mean a loss of millions of dollars 

 to Colorado and the suspension of more than half 

 of the larger irrigation projects of the state." 



The Colorado officials and Charles L. Allen, 

 attorney for the water users, contend not only 

 that they had the right to all the water they could 

 take out of the stream in their own state, but that, 

 because of the inevitable seepage and return flow of 

 the water used, the same amount would go farther 

 and could be used over and over again, if it was 

 taken out nearer the head of the stream, than if 

 allowed to run over into Nebraska across the arid 

 territory, where much of it would be lost by evap- 

 oration or be wasted through being unused. 



The question is specially vital to Colorado, ac- 

 cording to Farrar, because all of her streams flow 

 over into adjoining states. 



On its final settlement will depend the fate of 

 many irrigation enterprises on the Arkansas, the 

 Platte, the Laramie, the Grand, the Rio Grande and 

 the Las Animas rivers. 



REVALUATION OF PROJECTS 



(Continued from page 72) 



tary Lane's order, appearing in the September num- 

 ber of the Reclamation Record, said that the Board 

 of Review would definitely and finally decide the 

 cost of all the projects. 



"Will R. King, attorney for the Reclamation 

 Commission, visited the project. He also held that 

 Secretary Lane would be fair. A public meeting 

 was called to meet Mr. King. His attention was 

 called to the fact that the order said that Secretary 

 Lane had delegated the power to the Board of Re- 

 view to definitely and finally decide the cost of all 

 the projects. 



"Mr. King replied that this was a mistake, and 

 should have read : 'Secretary Lane will definitely 

 and finally decide the cost of all the projects.' Also, 

 Mr. King's attention was brought to the fact that 

 Secretary Lane's public notice, recently sent out, did 

 not apply to this project. The question was asked 

 him if that was a fact. He stated that it was. The 

 question was asked him why he did not recall those 

 notices. He said he would. As usual with the 

 Reclamation Service, it is a case of back up when 

 they see that they are caught. No doubt the inten- 

 tion was to catch as many sleeping as they could." 



