THE WORK OF THE RECLAMATION SERVICE. 377 



As before stated, nearh' ever}^ possibility of reclamation has been 

 under consideration by soniebody at some time, and while every effort 

 should be made to avoid interference, it is not fair to the communities 

 concerned nor to the Commonwealth for the reclamation service to 

 step aside in favor of speculative enterprises, especially when they 

 would only partly develop the opportunities. 



The following paragraphs are quoted from a statement b}' Hon. 

 Thomas E. Bard, a Senator from California, and chairman of the 

 Senate Committee on Irrigation : 



It is recog-nized tliat the pi-iuiary purpose oi' the rechiuiution act is to utilize 

 the public domain by means of irrigation and make it available for occ-upation 

 by settlers. The right to the use of the water provided by the expenditure of 

 the reclamation fund must be permanently attached to the land irrigated, and 

 "beneficial vise" is made the basis, the measure, and the limit of the right. In 

 every case where a considerable part of the irrigable lands are owned 1)y the 

 Government it is clearly inconsistent with the spirit of the act to permit such 

 lands to be subject forever to a load of charges for interest and profits to be 

 |iai(l uiH)n private capital invested in the irrigation works, these charges being 

 in addition to a high cost of maintenance. This is (\si)ecially questionable where 

 the water, instead of being attached to the land as an ajipurtenant right, is^i 

 owned and controlled by nonresident landlords. 



The reclamation act applies also to land in ])rivate ownership, and it is plain 

 that the general welfare of the nation requires that the water resources should 

 be made to subserve the greatest possible good. The declaration of the law that 

 the right to the use of the water shall be appurtenant to the land and that bene- 

 ficial use shall limit the right must be uudersood as a recognition of the general 

 l)rinciples and policies. 



By keeping the obvious intent of the law in mind it will be possible to solve 

 many of the dithcult questions which arise when ])rivate irrigation enterprises 

 interfere with Government pi-ojects. It is clearly the duty of the Reclamation 

 Service to investigate and determine whether a given private enterprise is 

 competent to utilize the irrigation resources to the fullest extent, and whether 

 the private \\-orlvS are of a permanent character. It is entirely proper for the 

 Service to refuse to al)andon its own projects until satisfactory guaranties are 

 given that these requirements will be provided. 



In short, the Service may, in the interest of the public, determine what shall 

 be the character and scope of the \\-ork to be undertaken by private enteri)rise 

 in this particular locality, and what shall be th(^ burden to be carried by the 

 irrigated lands, and may proi)erly assei-t that a compliance with such requii-e- 

 ments shall be the conditions upon which the Government shall surrend«M- its 

 right to provide the works and abandon its project. 



The reservoir sites and similar essential portions of a conq)rebensive jiroject 

 should I>e withdrawn from s])eculative entry by the Reclamation Service and 

 held for the largest practicable irrigation development. In cases where with- 

 drawals have been made and investigations begun, and whei-e i)romoters aslv 

 the Reclamation Service to step aside for their own benefit, they should lu^ able 

 to show, first, that they intend to construct in good faith and are not merely 

 speculators, and. second, that the project to be consti'ucted will be of real public 

 benefit, will develop the country fully, and will not act as an obstruction to 

 more comprehensive or economical systems. 



