431 



late the conditions of use. The latter favored a laissez faire policy of 

 exploitation for profit. Differences between the two Houses of Congress 

 obstnicted legislation to resolve this controversy. The House of Repre- 

 sentatives generally favored the conservationist position and the Sen- 

 ate was more inclined to favor private entrepreneurship. Eventually, in 

 1920, the Federal Water Power Act was passed, reserving to the Con- 

 gress the right to decide whether the Federal Government should 

 undertake to construct any recommended project. 



The right of exploitation of surface water for irrigation in arid parts 

 of the country was initially relinquished to State or local control by 

 an act of July 26, 1866. Federal encouragement of private irrigation 

 projects followed in 1877. Finally, the Reclamation Act of June 17, 

 1902, provided for construction of irrigation works by the Federal Gov- 

 ernment with repayment by users of the water into a revolving fund so 

 as to amortize the principal in 10 years (with no interest charged). 

 Irrigated acreage in a single farm was limited from the outset. The 

 acreage limitation remained thereafter, but the payment time to com- 

 plete amortization, without interest, was extended by steps up to the 

 present 40 years (plus 10 years of initial development). 



Early in the 20th century, it became apparent that in many instances 

 entire rivers were the best unit for planning, and that systems of dams, 

 locks, and powerplants could be designed to manage such streams as 

 a whole. 



At about the same time, the idea gathered force that dams and water 

 systems could be designed to serve such multiple purposes as flood 

 control, navigation, and power production all together — thereby inte- 

 grating benefits while telescoping costs. Congressional insistence on 

 the concept of multipurpose planning of water projects was first evi- 

 denced in the Federal Power Act of 1920, which instructed the Federal 

 Power Commission to issue licenses for the construction of dams only 

 when — 



* * * best adapted to a comprehensive scheme of improvement and utilization 

 for the purposes of navigation, of water power development, and of other bene- 

 ficial public uses * * *.* 



Then, in the early 1920's, a plan was developed for a huge multipur- 

 pose project on the Colorado River below the Grand Canyon. The 

 plan, advanced in the "Weymouth Report," of which a preliminary 

 version was published as Senate Document 142, 67th Congress, Second 

 Session, proposed five sets of benefits : 



(1) Flood control ; 



(2) Power; 



( 3 ) Silt reduction downstream ; 



(4) Stabilization of low flow (for eventual downstream irriga- 

 tion and municipal use) ; 



(5) Recreation. 



Approved in the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928, the Hoover 

 Dam met all of these goals. 



The most elaborate water program under single management, 

 before World War II, was the Tennessee Valley Authority, in which 



8 Act of .Tune 10, 1920, 41 Stat. 1063. Earlier, In the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1917, 

 the Concresg had authorized creation of a Waterwa.vs Commission whose purpose was to 

 coordinate water studies to resolve questions relating: to navigation. Irrigation, drainage, 

 forestry, arid and swamp land reclamation, desllting, flow stabilization, flood control, power, 

 erosion control, and municipal, industrial, and agricultural water supply. (Act of Aug. 8, 

 1917, 40 Stat. 250.) 



