upr000204 284

Mr. W. R. House 4# December 2 1, 1951 State engineer would be and I am asking Mr. Cory to give us his views as to the practicability of transferring our existing appropriation to a well which would inde­pendently provide the Railroad with an assured supply. I believe I am correct in stating that the Las Ve­gas Land and Water Company does not now take more water from the water field than is justified by its existing appropriations so the transfer of the Railroad appropri­ation to another well should not curtail its supply. I would suggest that the Division officers and the Indus­trial Engineer at Los Angeles, who are familiar with the Railroad requirements at Las Vegas and the potentialities of the shop grounds, give consideration to the most prac­tical manner of developing an independent supply for the Railroad Company. If the Railroad had an independent supply in excess of its immediate needs, it appears to me that it would be feasible to continue the present contract between the Railroad Company and the P.F.3. on the theory that the water furnished to the P.F.fi. was surplus water only. The amount of water furnished to others as surplus water would not then be so disproportionate to the Railroad use as it is at present. I can see no reason from a legal standpoint to pre­vent the domeatication of the Union Land Company and the transfer of the present real estate holdings of the Las Vegas Land and -ater Company in that state to the Union Land Company. I do not believe that there should be any trouble in the State of Nevada. I am asking Mr. Cory to give us his views on that question. E. 23. Bennett bcc - Mr. Win. Reinhardt Mr. Calvin M. Cory I am handing you herewith copy of Mr. Rouse’s let ter to Mr. Stoddard dated December 13, 1951*