Show moon lake and moonshine the respectfully ask you y li to yub lisa the following concerning eer ning the proposed moon lake labe irate for uintah river side of the dry gulch system as we are stockholders lii in the dry gulch aind the matter is important to us published reports indicate cost of the dam will be approximately fiobo per acre foot while faw fo maray years we have beena lead to believe that such cost would be much lower in fact wt mot mare talan half as buob our water supply now averages us more than 2 acre feet per ant aa num nu and ou stock sells tor for 5 to 7 per share OT acre in dry seasons such as 1919 1928 1929 and part of 1930 we need more water but even such we have more water than the awa 1 communities south of salt lake and west of the wasatch range ranee and we nay imay include the price river district under this same nead head the lake fork side elde of our com coax pany needs more ore wata lim lai dry years more so BO than does the uintah side lake atwood will double our alres mt fito ragn and other lakes may easily increase uintah side storage water to three times the present sto sta age lake fork side alde may stand this moon lake storage charge or cost but the side does not need it and we are too tar far advanced too much invested in our lakes ito to take up this additional load I 1 our side would la in addil loi to tie storage cost have to build a very expensive expansive canal which may cust coat at least so 50 per cent of 0 the dam I 1 cost at moon aloon lake but by canal we would obtain only yellowstone yeti yeli I 1 low stone water mot moon lake waty wate making exchange essential fu dry years yellowstone Yell owston la is not reliable we believe we do not need any storage water in normal years like 1929 when we never used our present storage in tal faidy ly dry years yean we need it and in extra dry seasons 0 n s we iveel more khari we now have but what we have iss Is ours paid for aind we believe we should continue to develop storage on the uintah side we believe that our costs paying the fede al debt we ar are e now paying building moon lake dam and then a large canal would make our costs pro hibi tive or perhaps as iauch la juch as 4 per acre per year this estimation or avow 3 per yew yea is too high present land and water values do not justify such euch annual east cost but we also believe that we should it if possible keep out of federal control because we have too much of such now mew we would tather rather operate our system than to have a boss cwm boom wasa instant act as dictator it appears to us ua that M atte canal not yet aw aa keyed in detail or the route definitely settled will be expensive to build and maan ing it will be very expensive much of it would come abang a foot hill country where moderate fe will deposit a large amount of silt anid ock cock because of r e the fact that such canal would not be used maed for more than sixty days per year whon deeded ne ded and some years would not be needed or used for our benefit advice to us in that soaking it up would cost can considerable sid as cuts would result cracks aphea wad aid delay unavoidable heavy storms storine above ane canal would ash out sections of it and gener ener ally it at a time of the year when we would reed need the water and flumes blumes costly repairs would be nece necessary osary storms in that area would be expected 1 as we all know tili reo times more often than in ili ill the roosevelt I 1 therefore Thee tho etore fore we respectfully register J our objection to the side helping to build moon lake and we believe that the momy we have already paid pa id for those rights in that lake should be paid back to us by the lake fork side don target farget july si signed ned by J P MAY editors note the above article has several signers all of which awo a e stockholders in the coro fr from om the vinitah side aide |