THE WORK OF THE RECLAMATION SERVICE. 377 



As before stated, nearly every possibility of reclamation has been 

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

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

 concerned nor to the Connnonwealth for the reclamation service to 

 step aside in favor of speculative enterprises, es])ecially when they 

 would only partly develop the opportunities. 



The following paraii'raphs are (juoted from a statement by Hon. 

 Thonuis K. Bard, a Senator from California, and chairman of the 

 Senate Committee on Irrigation : 



It is n>(Oi,'nized that the pi'liuary purpose of the rechimation act is to utilize 

 the i)ul)lic (loinain by means of irrigation and make it available for occupation 

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

 the reclamation fund must be ])ernianently attached to the land irrigated, and 

 "beneticial use" is made tlie basis, the measure, and the limit of the right. In 

 every case where a considei-able jtart of the irrigal)le lands are owned by the 

 Government it is clearly inconsistent with the spirit of the act to j)ermit such 

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

 paid ui)on private capital invested in the irrigation works, these charges being 

 in addition to a high cost of maintenance. This is especially questionable where 

 the water, instead of being attached to the land as an appurtenant right, is 

 owned and controlled by nonresident landlords. 



TIk^ reclamation act applies also to land in private ownership, and it is plain 

 that the general welfare of the nation re(iuires that the water resources should 

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

 the riglit to the use of the wiiter shall be appurtenant to the land and that bene- 

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

 priucii)les and policies. 



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

 many of the difiicult questions which arise when private irrigation enterprises 

 interfere with Government projects. It is clearly the duty of the Reclamation 

 Service to investigate and determine whether a given in-ivate enterprise is 

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

 the private works are of a permanent character. It is entirely proi)er for the 

 Service to refuse to abandon 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 work to be undertaken by private enterprise 

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

 irrigated lands, and may properly assert that a compliance with such require- 

 ments shall be the conditions upon which the Government shall surrender its 

 right to provide the works and abandon its project. 



The reservoir sites and similar essential portions of a comitrehensive project 

 should be withdrawn from sjieculative entry by the IJeclamation Service and 

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

 drawals have l>een made and investigations begun, and where promoters ask 

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

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

 speculators, and. second, that the project to be constructed will be of real ]mblic 

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

 more comprehensive or economical systems. 



