THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



331 



EQUITIES OF THE SENIOR IRRIGATOR. 



BY PROF. 0. L. WALLER, PULLMAN, WASH. 



(Paper read before "Production by Irrigation Section," Thir- 

 teenth National Irrigation Congress.) 



The statutes of this State have permitted claimants 

 to file upon any quantity of water that suited their 

 desires and left without restrictions as to head works, 

 character of canals, etc. Consequently the first of these 

 two classes have usually brought the water to their lands 

 and distributed it as cheaply as possible, used open, 

 poorly constructed, wasteful ditches and distributed it 

 over gravel, through long, leaky furrows. For many 

 years the State as grantor raised no objection, in fact, 

 the commonwealth and rancher both considered it the 

 proper thing. 



Now since the irrigator acquired his rights under 

 this regime, may he not maintain them under the same 

 conditions? Is it right that he should pay the bills 

 to cover all legislative errors? When the State becomes 

 wise and wishes to curtail so improvident a use of water, 

 should she not provide a way to help the farmer to more 

 thrifty and economical methods, or shall she pass laws 



Northern Pacific Irrigation Canal at Kennewick, Wash , showing town 

 of Kennewick. looking northwest. 



limiting the use and thereby pla-ce a heavy tax on the 

 farmer caused by extensive changes and repairs to his 

 canal and distributing system, the installation of more 

 head ditches, flumes and cement linings, etc. ? 



.Who are the chief beneficiaries of all this expense ? 

 Clearly the State, by way of increased taxable property, 

 and the junior appropriators who get in on the surplus 

 water thereby provided. The junior appropriator reaps 

 a double benefit. He not only gets the surplus water, 

 but he selects land fairly in the midst of improved 

 areas and close to city markets, all of which have been 

 provided by the labors and hardships of the senior ap- 

 propriator. 



But we are told that the water belongs to the State 

 and that no one should have more than he can bene- 

 ficially use ; that he may not waste water ; that the State 

 holds "it in trust for all. We may grant this, but who 

 will define beneficial use and waste? Beneficial use is 

 surely a function of the method of application, and of 

 the crop raised. The State, however, has never pre- 

 scribed the manner of applying water to arid lands, 

 nor the amounts needed for specified crops. Neither 

 has she defined waste. Not only this, hut the very 



method provided by the State of securing the use of 

 water has encouraged very wasteful methods. Waste is 

 hatd to define, it clearly depends on the methods of ap- 

 plying water and on the retentive or non-retentive char- 

 acter of the soil receiving it. It is largely a function 

 of locality. What would be considered an economical 

 and frugal use of water in one locality and on one class 

 of soils would be extremely wasteful in another. 



There are thousands of acres of river bar farms 

 in the Yakima valley which have shallow soils and deep, 

 coarse gravel sub-soils. They are veritable strainers. 

 The loss in ditches is extremely large, then again if the 

 furrows are any length the losses near the head ditches 

 are excessive and the plan must be made correspond- 

 ingly large if any of it is to reach the lower ends. You 

 can carry water in a leaky pail, in a rather dilapidated 

 flume, or over porous gravel, but always at great loss. 

 Farmers on such lands in digging ditches follow about 

 the same system of irrigating that their neighbors do 

 on deep, loamy soil. The expense of getting water onto 

 the land in both instances is not different. In the 

 method of appropriating, however, the State has made 

 no distinction as to the lands. In the first instance 

 twice to three times the amount of water must be di- 

 verted from the river for use on the lands as in the lat- 

 ter case. The ditches are harder to maintain. In some 

 instances expensive flumes must be built and maintained 

 to even get the water over the gravel and on to the 

 land. The ditch must be excavated extra deep and wide 

 and be refilled with fine material to make it carry water 

 at all. In some soils water penetrates slowly, is kept 

 near the surface and is thus easily carried over in ditches 

 with little loss, while others are coarse, open and leachy. 

 The water penetrates them like a seive and is rapidly 

 lost iii a leaky sub-so ; l. Once beyond the roots of the 

 plant it is wasteful so far as performing any service 

 to the plant is concerned. 



Now some one comes along and says these fellows 

 are using too much water, makes a filling on the stream 

 above them for some big project. The State accepts 

 the filing, permits the claimant to construct a large 

 system of canals and to sell lands and unguaranteed 

 water rights to innocent purchasers. The State be- 

 comes a party to the fraud. When the shortage of water 

 comes, or the State by statute limits the amount to be 

 used, the senior appropriator find that a heavy outlay 

 in flumes, pipes, lined ditches, more numerous head 

 ditches, etc., is necessary if he is to maintain the output 

 of his farm. If the junior appropriator should be for- 

 tunate enough (as most of them are) to have a deep, 

 loamy soil, the old plan of ditching will be ample for 

 him. 



In the above illustration the senior appropriators 

 have done no wrong, they were the pioneers, suffered the 

 hardships of an arid country and complied literally 

 with the requirements of the State in their water ap- 

 propriations. Can the State honorably abandon these 

 people to greedy interests that seek to reap a harvest 

 of wealth from the irrigating waters of the State ? Can 

 the State honorably fix a statutory limit to the amount 

 of water to be used per acre in irrigation farming with- 

 out first making a systematic study of the actual need 

 for thrifty farming? Shall we legislate a limit to the 

 amount to be used? Or in other words, shall we call 

 upon the legislature to add their guess as to the quan- 

 tity required, or shall we study the soils and climate and 

 methods of cultivation and of applying the water, and 



