upr000160 90

ftr* W* ». 'house 4* ' I3e$«*ber 21, 1951 I m engineer would t># and. t »m nkifi| -.e* Cory to' give # us hie views m to the- pT&eticiMXity of transferring our existing oF|?ropf*lKtiert to ••# wall iflkleh would t®de-provide the Railroad with? an assured sup ply. • '.* | I ball two I am correct la sts-ting that the m k~ yaa Land. and i%ier Company does not now taka Bono water from the water field than -is justified by its existing appropriations so the transfer of the Railroad appropri­ation to toother well should not curtail Its supply. I wold suggest that the Division off!oar® and' the Indus­trial Engineer at Lea 'Angelas, who are familiar with the ftallre&d requirements?if Le® ehd the potanti alitise of the shop ;? rounds, ..five consideration to- the most prac­tical mp.mrnr of developing, tit Independent 'supply for the deilroad iempe&y# r^llS If the Milroad hod , an. Independent supply in excess of its immediate needs, it apjweers to me that it would be feasible to continue the (present sontrept 'between the Railroad 0e»p»»y and the r.IVi, oh the theory that the' water funtished to the ! was surplus water only. The amount of water furnished to others as surplus water would not then be so' disproportionate to tho -r.i tread use m it* Is at. present# I can oee no reason from lege! standpoint to pre­vent the dement ieet ieyt of the • i&tidi d|«pit»y and the trettafar of the present reel estate -holdings. <M* the Las . .Vdge* Load end' rater Dampeny in thgt abate to the Vision Land Sonpany. .1 do net -believe that there should be any trouble in-the State of Jfeved*. X ns? asking . r> Dory to give us his views on that. cuaefcltm. if Dennett bcc - Mr. Wm. Reinhardt Mr. Galvin PI. Gory * I am handing you herewith copy of Mr. Rouse*s let­ter to Mr. Stoddard dated December 1$, 1951.-