40 



THE IERIGATION AGE. 



Are Government Officials Playing Fair? 



Some Facts About the Owens River Valley Condition. 



During the past month the editor of this journal 

 made a trip of some six thousand miles, covering the 

 states of Nebraska, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, California, 

 Oregon, Washington, Idaho and Wyoming, and visited 

 during that time many of the leading irrigation projects 

 in the states named. 



The principal object of his visit in the far west 

 was, however, to look into the matter of the complaints 

 made by the Owens Eiver Valley people in Inyo county, 

 California, and learn of their treatment by the Forestry 

 and Eeclamation Bureaus. 



Many complaints have reached us and have also 

 been presented at the two last irrigation congresses by 

 the people from Inyo county, who claim that they are 

 not being treated fairly by the Reclamation Service 

 and the Forestry Bureau. A strong effort was made at 

 Sacramento to keep the evidence in the hands of the 

 representatives from this section from the resolutions 

 committee. It was, however, taken up by the com- 

 mittee in Albuquerque this year, and after much 

 manipulation a resolution was passed. 



Through the instrumentality of Geo. H. Maxwell 

 and some of his cohorts this resolution was so well 

 trimmed that it will come forth with no particular 

 feature which may be used in the interest of the com- 

 plainants. 



The Owens River Valley has been inhabited for up- 

 wards of sixty years by white people. The present 

 population, of the valley is about five thousand. The 

 Owens River Valley proper is about one hundred miles 

 in length and in continuation of this valley on the 

 south are the Rose Spring Valley of about fifteen thou- 

 sand acres and Indian Wells Valley, which borders on 

 the Mojave desert, covering an area of about 200,000 

 acres. While the Indian Wells Valley is not strictly 

 a part of the Owens River Valley, it would have formed 

 a great part of the Federal irrigation project which 

 was contemplated as early as 1903, had that work been 

 carried forward. 



In the year 1906 a large area of land in Owens 

 River Valley was withdrawn from entry by order of the 

 Secretary of the Interior. During the year 1903 this 

 same area was withdrawn or segregated under the Recla- 

 mation Act, and later, in 1904, several sites which had 

 been considered feasible by the inhabitants of the val- 

 ley for reservoir purposes, with a view to reclaim the 

 entire area of the Owens River Valley, were withdrawn 

 from any kind of entry and lifted entirely away from 

 the control of the inhabitants of the valley. This was 

 done with the full knowledge and acquiescense of the 

 inhabitants, who were led to believe by government en- 

 gineers that the Reclamation Service would take up 

 this work and carry it to a logical finish ; in fact, this 

 statement was repeatedly made by local representatives 

 of the Reclamation Service, and the people were very 

 glad indeed to co-operate with the government for the 

 ultimate good of their section. 



Surveys were made by the Reclamation officers, 

 and the people of the valley had entire confidence in 

 the intent and integrity of the officials at Washington. 

 Work dragged on slowly, however, and after many pro- 



tests, asking for a release of the reservoir sites and a 

 release also from the agreement which was entered into 

 whereby all of the rights of the settlers in the valley 

 were practically placed in the control of government 

 officials, about 115,000 acres set aside for the reclama- 

 tion work were restored to entry, but this was not done 

 until through some manipulation or understanding be- 

 tween the Reclamation and Forestry Bureaus, 35,000 

 acres were immediately withdrawn and placed under the 

 control of the Forestry Bureau, which left 75,000 acres 

 (a small tract around Bishop) free from all forms of 

 withdrawal. 



All of the balance of the land of the Owens River 

 water shed is now held from entry under the forestry 

 withdrawals, about 500,000 acres; notwithstanding the 

 Smith bill which restored to entry under the Homestead 

 act all agricultural lands in the forest reserve (which 

 was supposed to cover all of the agricultural lands in 

 the forest reserve) . 



There are over 70,000 acres of land withdrawn 

 under a blanket order, which, eliminating the patented 

 lands under the description, totals over 50,000 acres 

 of the finest agricultural lands, the order specifying 

 that "the lands are withdrawn from any form of dis- 

 position what ever under the Public Land laws until 

 further ordered by the department for the benefit of the 

 city of Los Angeles, California, in connection with its 

 Owens River project." The general trend of these or- 

 ders would indicate a direct effort on the part of the de- 

 partment to favor Los Angeles against the interest and 

 contentions of the inhabitants of Owens River Valley. 



On December 21, 1906, the department ordered the 

 withdrawal of over 100,000 acres. On January 8, 1907, 

 a portion of this land was restored to entry, the order 

 stating specifically that said withdrawal and said 

 restoration were made under the act of June 17, 1902, 

 for reclamation purposes. The bill for advertising 

 said restoration was paid. 



On September 18, 1907, a letter was received from 

 the department stating that this withdrawal was made 

 "as being needed by the city of Los Angeles in con- 

 nection with its Owens River project under the pro- 

 visions of the Act of June 30, 1906 (Stat. 34-801), 

 and not under the Act of June 17, 1902. 



To one who is investigating in order that facts 

 may be brought out this would, we believe, conclusively 

 prove collusion, or attempt to mislead officials of the 

 land office in the matter of favoring the city of Los 

 Angeles or some monied interests connected therewith 

 as against the settlers of the Owens River Valley. It 

 would also tend to show that on the date of issuing 

 the first order of withdrawal, these officials knew that 

 the withdrawal was made for the city and not for the 

 purposes therein stated, and to the casual observer 

 would indicate clearly that an effort was made on the 

 part of these officials to "cover their tracks." 



From what is locally known as the conduit where 

 water is to be taken out of the Owens River near the 

 town of Independence for the Los Angeles project, a 

 strip of sections ^of land is withdrawn from all forms 

 of entry under the special withdrawals of the Secretary 



