UNLV Special Collections provides copies of materials to facilitate private study, scholarship, or research. Material not in the public domain may be used according to fair use of copyrighted materials as defined by copyright law. Please cite us.
Please note that UNLV may not own the copyright to these materials and cannot provide permission to publish or distribute materials when UNLV is not the copyright holder. The user is solely responsible for determining the copyright status of materials and obtaining permission to use material from the copyright holder and for determining whether any permissions relating to any other rights are necessary for the intended use, and for obtaining all required permissions beyond that allowed by fair use.
Read more about our reproduction and use policy.
I agree.When applying for a permit for the water from the new artesian well they needed to be careful not to apply for more than the actual flow, minus the amount of water needed for other purposes. Letter also refers to Mr. Drew and Mr. Perkins.
hln001065. Union Pacific Railroad Collection, 1828-1995. MS-00397. Special Collections and Archives, University Libraries, University of Nevada, Las Vegas. Las Vegas, Nevada. http://n2t.net/ark:/62930/d15h7ft68
English
Water Application 7201, LVL&W Co- for municipal uses Water Application 7202, LVMtW Co- for irrigation. A.S.H. NOV 19, 1931 Los Angeles, Nov. 19, 1931 Mr. R. L. Adamson: You have copy of my letter of November 10th addressed to George W. Malone, State Engineer, Carson City, Nevada, and I am enclosing herewith copy of his reply thereto under date of November 12th, and copy of letter from Leo under same date, relative to proofs to be made for irrigation purposes. It would seem to me that the map filed with the State Engineer in Application 7200, supplemented to show the connection from the railroad yards to point of delivery to Las Vegas Land and Water Company for municipal uses, and defining the creek channel carrying the water from the well to the ranch, with an additional map sheet showing the location of the Las Vegas creek and the diversion ditch at the ranch, with cultural map showing legal subdivisions upon which the water from the well has been applied to a beneficial use,-- will cover the situation. In my opinion, we should be careful not to make proof of application of water to a beneficial use for irrigation in excess of the actual flow of the artesian well, after deducting 2.5 s.f. heretofore appropriated for railroad uses and 2.5 s.f. appropriated for municipal uses- Las Vegas city. Our measurements seem to differ; the water measurements reported as flowing from the well in 1927 appear to be 4.18 s.f. I have data in my files showing that the maximum flow of the well was 8.16 s.f., while Perkins- at the hearing on the water rates at Las Vegas- fixed the total flow of the well at 6.68 s.f., which I think is about correct. The proofs submitted at the hearing at Las Vegas showed that we were actually using- for municipal purposes- during the year 1930- 2.46 s.f., or .26 s.f. more than our appropriation, which excess, of course, we figure is taken from our vested right in the Spring. As the water now flowing down the creek to the ranch from the well over and above the amount used for railroad and municipal purposes would not be a fair average, it might be well to measure the water actually flowing from the well to the ranch at this time. It appeared at the hearing- from Mr. Drew's testimony- that during the peak months of user, namely, July and August, the town consumption was probably more than 2.46 s.f., and for this reason we should figure on the minimum amount flowing down the creek- for agricultural purposes. These proofs are due before December 8th and as our time is short, it might be well to ask for an extension of sixty or ninety days, within which to file each of these proofs, if you believe it is necessary. cc--ASH C.A. W.B. L.A.M. F. R. MCNAMEE