72 
There being no official examination and acceptance of these claims 
filed, what is the result of the uncontrolled and indiscriminate riling 4 
District No. 4 has suffered little from filings as compared with other 
districts since adjudications were had. On page 47 is a summary of the 
filings made since 1887, which shows claim for nearly three times the 
average flow of the stream for ditches alone, and for reservoirs of 
nearly 7,500,000,000 cubic feet — more than the entire flow in the river 
for an average year. In addition to this, it must be remembered that 
the amount of water actually decreed to ditches only by the courts 
(see table of decrees, page 64), and which are prior to these claim-, is 
nearly 200 cubic feet per second in excess of the maximum recorded 
flow of the river during the last twelve years and exceeds the average 
recorded flow for the month of June by 1,657 cubic feet per second. 
Now, add to this reservoir decrees to the extent of 15,000 acre-feet. 
This tendency to make excessive filings and claims was encouraged by 
the condition of the decrees, they being, as indicated, far in excess of 
the amount available, while, in point of fact, after the old ditches were 
filled there remained in the stream and subject to appropriation con- 
siderable unused water. 
It was very unwise in the beginning not to have some control and 
restriction of these filings. One man files on "all the surplus and 
unappropriated water" without doing an}' work other than a rough 
survey, and, too, after the waters have been filed on to ten times the 
discharge of the stream. Another files on "50,000 cubic feet per 
second," when the stream, in its wildest moments of storm, melting 
snow, and cloudburst, never carried one-tenth that amount; and there 
those absurd " filings" stand like specters, intimidating bona fide set- 
tlers and legitimate corporate enterprise and casting doubt upon the 
title to water of existing ditches. 
The law of 1881 was intended to determine the rights to water of 
different claimants and to fix those rights; to bring to a stop, as it 
were, the old order of things and to start a new, with the past definitely 
settled and the future controlled. The records to this time depended 
on the memory of the "oldest inhabitant," who was passing away. 
The difficulties of a just determination were great, but their impor- 
tance was greater, though hardly appreciated by either the claimants 
or the courts. Each appropriator presented his claim, and his neigh- 
bors and friends corroborated his statements. Almost never was any- 
one's claim questioned or examined by others interested. The only 
question gone into with any thoroughness was the date of priority; 
the size, length, capacity, and location were mere statements. The 
acreage to be irrigated, while generally given, was guessed at. as was 
the amount necessary to an acre. The location of the canal and the 
ownership were in no more definite form. Especially noticeable was 
the absence of any State control or any effort on the part of the State 
to protect the interests of those who were to come after. A "cubic 
