Show in 11 u. u a De menu 4 E UTAH LAKE WATER SUIT FILED F Three Thousand Defendants Are Named in Case 1 Action Involves Water Valued at From to Big Corporations Corporations' Affected r i r J Reputedly Reputedly- the largest water vater laws lawsuit it ever filed in Utah 1 involving an n estimated water value of to was filed in Third district court Thursday asking r j adjudication of rights to waters waters' of Utah lake and its tributaries The complaint was filed by attorneys for the Associated Canal companies comprising Salt alt Lake City the Utah and Salt Lake Canal c company the East Jordan Irrigation ion com corn company company pany the South Jordan Canal company and ih the North Jordan Jordan Jor Jor- dan Irrigation comp company ny Approximately defendants are named in the tho page 24 como complaint com corn o plaint Including the state of at Utah I the the federal land bank of Berkeley the Columbia Steel company the tho o Continental Oil on company the Denver Denver Denver Den Den- ver Rio Grande Grando Western Vestern Railroad I company the Salt Lake Utah Railroad company the United States Smelting Refining and Mining company company com corn pany the Utah Copper company citizens of Utah California Idaho Illinois Nevada Oklahoma and Washington and other corporations I and individuals claiming rights to wat waters rs of Utah lako lake and Its tr tribu tribu- bu- bu Lanes Complaint Asks Besides adjudication of ot rights right to this water the tho t asks 1 That Tha the jurisdiction Juris juris- diction and control l over v r tho th waters waters wa wi and or sons to supervise diversion and distribution 2 That the defendants be he en enjoined en en- joined from winter flooding land along the tributaries 3 That any water impounded by defendants bo be diverted accordIng accordIng accordIng accord- accord Ing to court decree 4 1 That a aday day be bo fixed at regular regular regu regu- lar intervals intervals when the court would hear and determine any matter affecting control of ot the water 5 5 That the tho defendants be bo required re re- re required required to set forth their water rights 6 6 That title to water rights bl bo be quieted 7 That the costs of tho the court action be awarded the plaintiff ft Largest Water Vater Suit Authority for tor this being the largest largest larg larg- est water suit in the thc history of ot the tho state are City Cily Attorney Fisher Earris Harris Har Ear ris City Water Commissioner George D. D Keyser and City Engineer William D. D Beers The value of the water rights in involved involved involved in- in is estimated on a basis of per second foot toot which water authorities say is an average evaluation evaluation evalu evalu- for Irrigation water Tho The Associated Canal companies is managed so far as water of Utah lake lako is concerned by a board of ot can canal III presidents who last fall engaged engaged en- en Philo T. T Farnsworth to tako take legal action to settle controversies that have flared regularly for sev sev- several several eral years between claimants over rights The controversy became becam particularly active last summer when the Associated Canal companies companies compa compa- nies alleged Illegal diversion of ot water at the head of ot Provo river the tho principal tributary to Utah lake Attorneys in Suit Thursdays Thursday suit was filed tiled by Van Cott Riter Rite and Farnsworth as at attorneys attorneys attorneys at- at for the plaintiffs Associated Associated Associated in the suit are arc Fisher Harris counsel fo for Salt Lake City H. H 1 L. L counsel for Utah and d Salt Lake Canal company Cheney Jensen Jensen Jen Jon sen Sen Marr Man and Wilkins counsel for North Jordan Irrigation company Ingebretsen Ray Rawlins and Christensen counsel for South Jordan Jordan Jordan Jor Jor- dan Canal company The complaint points out that the tho plaintiffs have hav been owners of ot rights to Jordan river water flowing flowing flow flow- ing from Utah lake for lor more than 50 cn Years vears from tho tha North Jord Jordan n Irrigation comp company's nys appropriation ap appropriation ap- ap in 1853 to that of at the East Jordan Irrigation company In 1878 1873 The Tho complaint blames the subnormal subnormal subnormal sub sub- normal level of Utah lake lako upon al alleged al- al illegal diversion by the de- de Continued on Page Pa Two Column One BIG UTAH LAKE ACTION FILED Continued d item loom Pal Pate Pare One ti of tributary water an and and 1935 1 upon pon the drouth Crouth of oC 1931 1934 Grac Crisis Crisis' MA fA grave crisis now confronts those who have havn been accustomed to uso 1150 water wate from fr m 82 said d Jake lake and its tributaries And there thero win inevitably be a ft scarcity of oC water during the Irrigation I arisen for tor tho year 1936 that will make Impo impossible the irrigation Irrigation irrigation gation and maturing of crops on many of acres of or cultivated cultivated cultivated land which have heretofore ie been irrigated with water from said lake a and d its tributaries tho complaint complaint complaint com com- plaint ar It is it alleged that all aU but a trivial number of defendants defendants' rights are Inferior to those of ot the tho plaintiffs As to winter flooding of lands Which tho the associated companies asked to be bo halted the complaint says of ot said It was a common practice defendants during the no a seasons of ot the tho years ears 1934 1935 and 1936 1636 to flood fload their lands with water from said tributaries and that view view view-of of said ald practice especially in aid said drouth emergency was and is grossly wasteful and should not be permitted Water In Is Lost Such water has be been n lost and can never reach Utah lake Jake it Is co con con- tended The state of ot Utah is brought into the case Because Deause the state engineer has haJI control of ot but one tributary Spanish Fork river It is alleged because of insufficient funds and too few it is impossible for lor the engineer to comply with the law relating to adjudication of water rights Concerning the tho court taking over Jurisdiction the tho complaint says In order to preserve and enforce the rights u of those entitled to water from Utah Jake lake and its tributaries it is vi vitally tall essential that this court assume jurisdiction and control over the waters of said lake and its tributaries trib- trib and appoint one or more persons persona to act for tor it in the premises premises prem prem- ses and carry into effect such orders as ma may be issued In explanation of ot the complaint complain Ur hir Farnsworth said In ing ng this action there is no purpose to take from rom any claimant water to o the use of which he is entitled but mt when there Is ins Insufficient water water water wa wa- ter for tor all the senior rights of or the older appropriators must be rec- rec The purpose he explained is to obtain adjudication of rights of every very person corporation and nd association association asso- asso asserting any claim to the water vater of the lake Jake or tributaries The uThe plaintiffs fully appreciate the tie annoyance and expense incident to o a major water suit stilt of ot this type but ut especially In view of drouth co conditions during and sin since co 1934 with the possibility of ot a continued water shortage they feel teel that that that-no no alternative is open open to them other than the prosecution of a a. suit that thai will Mil authoritatively determine all al rights and afford a a. a prompt and effective effective effective ef ef- ef- ef remedy when rights rights' of senior appropriators are violated and Water water water wa wa- ter to which they are aro entitled is wrongfully diverted by junior ap ap- ap- ap There are many old water rights rightson on the tho various tributaries of Utah lake and plaintiffs believe that the prosecution of this suit is as vital to the owners of ot those rights as asit asit asit it Is to the plaintiffs |