upr000290 15

d istrict* Those are just suggestions — the things that we might give some thought to , MR, SMITH* I think the point is very well take, Mr. Grant, and we gave some thought to that in connection with the Ken* report a number of years ago - by pumping water from Mead Lake to serve this area with water fo r a ll sorts of purposes, and i t was f e l t at that time, and we discussed i t with the Attorney General, that the proper in it ia l steps was fo r an irrigation d is t r ic t under Nevada law. With such a program as you have outlined, i t would be necessary to form such a d is tr ic t in order to negotiate with the Department o f the In terior, MR. GRANT* Following the reoeipt, you re ca ll, of the Kerr Report, it was about that time, Gray and myself carried on this correspondence - that this question came up* The Kerr Report in it s e l f dealt with agricultural use, and nothing e lse . The Bureau of Reclamation Report didn’ t go into domestic or indus­t r ia l use. I think the fie ld has broadened a lo t since the in it ia l Kerr Report. MR. SMITH* It was evident, when we examined the Kerr Report, that the cost of development was excessive, and we asked fo r supplemental reports, giving consideration to the delivery o f two differen t amounts of water fo r use in the City of Las Vegas, municipal water - and when those were gotten out and drawn up by different engineers, the picture wasn’ t very much better. The construction costs and delivery costs were too great as set up by the Bureau. MR. GRIFFITH* Mr, Shamberger, in lim iting the issuance of permits fo r d rillin g adjacent to the Las Vegas Land and Water Company - are people outside o f that immediate area going to have prior rights above these pending permits, and what is the process either by opinion or by experts as to who is withdrawing the unappropriated waters? I have become interested la te ly in developing a small area, and find that my property is not going to operate without water, and I find that the d rillin g of Tule Springs or Paradise Valley is a matter of opinion as to where they are getting that water, I contend your opinion is not expert as to where one stops and another sta rts, and i t s t i l l is a matter of opinion. I f we are technically stopped from future d rillin g o f some w ells - then a ll d rillin g should be stopped u n til the problem is solved, and u n til we get an additional supply of water. I f Mr. Strong or the Water Company refuses or declines the resp on sib ility of bringing the additional supply into this Valley (although he didn’ t say sol — so i f the State Engineer is just to stop a ll d rillin g u n til i t is defined by expert opinion - I don’ t see why any one should go beyond any other individual or corporation fo r unappropriated waters which might be under dispute. MR. SHAMBERGER* The rights are determined on p rio rity . We haven’ t said that we are going to prevent a ll d r illin g . Your application on that area has a certain p riority , and i f other permits are granted in other areas to d r ill now, and la ter we find out its the same water source or the same aquacade, the p riority would relate back to your permit, and the later permit would be restricted . We don’ t know yet how many connections there are between some of the aquacades. We believe that by this investigation, we can determine that. Neither Mr. Smith nor myself want you people to fe e l that the story is en tirely pessism istic. After our studies have been completed, you may fin d that there's a great amount of additional development that can be done. On the other hand, we may find that we have about reached the lim it. Our policy would be to go slow altogether, and to watch fo r a year or so while we are carrying on this investigation. I f we fin d , fo r instance, that the aquacades out there are not connected with those out here, then I think the water law is broad enough so that we can permit d rillin g in one aquacade, and r e s tr ic t i t in another i f the water is not available. (11)