THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



41 



irrigated lands in comparison with an equal dry 

 farming area. As the land to be irrigated is well 

 scattered throughout the dry farming and grazing 

 districts, it is also apparent that the value of such 

 lands will be somewhat enhanced through the irri- 

 gation of adjoining tracts. 



The courts are becoming educated to the value 

 of water and are now less willing than formerly 

 to grant extravagant claims in water adjudications. 

 If twice the amount of water necessary to produce 

 crops is allowed, it is readily apparent that the ulti- 

 mate area to be irrigated will be reduced approxi- 

 mately one-half. For this reason the public is 

 vitally concerned as to the duty of water. Public 

 funds have accordingly been appropriated for the 

 making of accurate stream measurements extending 

 over long series of years, for the making of topo- 

 graphic surveys and river profiles, and for determin- 

 ing the quality of the public waters. There is thus 

 a general awakening among all classes as to the 

 importance of irrigation. 



The value of dry farming lands ranges from 

 about $5 to $30 per acre. Irrigated, this land would 

 sell from $40 to $100 or more per acre. Improved 

 irrigated land has been known to sell at from $500 

 to $1,000 per acre, and over. Water has, therefore, 

 considerable value, and water rights and titles are 

 now receiving careful consideration. In some sec- 

 tions one cubic foot per second of water, flowing 

 continuously during the irrigation season is esti- 

 mated to be worth approximately $10,000. 



The cost of irrigation works has increased from 

 $5 per acre in 1900 to an average of $15 in 1910, 

 according to the government census and systems 

 are now planned or are under construction esti- 

 mated to cost $40 to $100 per acre. The amount of 

 water and record evidence of water titles are there- 

 fore important matters, which are now given serious 

 consideration by the investor, the water user, and 

 the public. 



In 1909, Oregon adopted a water law which is 

 similar in many respects to that now in force in 

 the Province of British Columbia. It has in gen- 

 eral been found satisfactory to both the water user 

 and the prospective investor, and is not burdensome 

 to the public, as the fees, collected and paid into the 

 state treasury, have gone far towards meeting the 

 appropriations for its maintenance. 



The law deals primarily with (1) the adjudica- 

 tion and recording of rights to water which were 

 initiated prior to its adoption ; (2) the granting of 

 new rights after proper application and record, and 

 (3) the protection of all recorded rights, as well 

 as of the public interest in unappropriated waters. 

 Its administration is in the hands of the state en- 

 gineer and the superintendents of the two water 

 divisions into which the state has been divided, each 

 of whom has special duties to perform. All im- 

 portant grants or decisions are made by these 

 officers sitting as a board. 



This law declares all water within the state to 

 be the property of the public, and makes beneficial 

 use the basis of rights to its use. In the water right 

 certificate, which is record evidence of title, this 

 basis is qualified by a definite statement as to (1) 

 the priority, (2) the purpose, (3) the period, (4) 

 and the place of use of water; also by (5) the maxi- 

 mum rate of flow or quantity of water. Such cer- 



tificate gives also the name and address of the 

 owner of the right, and the stream from which the 

 water is diverted. 



Owing to the peculiarities of climate and soil, 

 and to the necessity for diverting water for irriga- 

 tion and other uses, the strict common law doc- 

 trine of riparian rights established by early court 

 decisions has been so modified in recent cases that 

 only the faintest shadow of this conflicting doctrine 

 remains to cloud the horizon of the investor in 

 water projects. In some of our states the common 

 law doctrine still prevails in modified form and is a 

 serious handicap to the adoption of modern admin- 

 istrative water codes. The Canadian provinces 

 should be congratulated upon the freedom with 

 which they can adopt laws suited to their condi- 

 tions, without a long period of turmoil and expen- 

 sive litigation by those who wish for some per- 

 sonal or financial benefit, to have the streams flow 

 undiminished to the ocean. 



Although our water code has been in effect four 

 years, we are just reaching the point where its prac- 

 tical operation can be observed by the irrigator. 

 All rights to water on a number of streams have 

 been adjudicated and recorded, and water masters 

 have been in charge of distribution. These water 

 masters are appointed by the water board, but are 

 paid by the county court. They are thus not as 

 responsive to orders of the superintendent and the 

 board as if paid directly by such board, and sub- 

 ject to dismissal for cause. Another difficulty has 

 been the requirement of law that water masters 

 should be residents of the district from which they 

 are appointed. This prevents the promotion of ex- 

 perienced men to the more complicated districts. 



In defining water rights in Oregon, the water 

 board has generally specified a particular rate of 

 flow for a definite irrigation season. When the 

 amount of water thus decreed was too small to fur- 

 nish an adequate irrigation head, rotation was au- 

 thorized. In this way each man could at any time 

 ascertain whether or not his neighbor was taking 

 more than his share. In case of rotation among a 

 group of neighbors, the total quantity of water used 

 by any one, should not exceed the sum of that 

 allotted to each. Self interest will cause each man 

 in such rotation group to see that he gets the total 

 quantity of water his full share of the time. Such 

 a decree is almost self-executing, as the average 

 water user is honest and will not take more than he 

 is entitled to, if he knows the water supply is not 

 sufficient for all. In Wyoming, where they have 

 had long experience in distributing water, it is the 

 exception rather than the rule to call out the water 

 master to administer such decrees. 



For old rights, one cubic foot per second is 

 usually allowed for 50 to 80 acres, depending upon 

 local conditions. All new grants for irrigation pur- 

 poses have been restricted to the rate of one cubic 

 foot per second to 80 acres. The average irrigation 

 season, or time between the last killing frost in the 

 spring and first in the fall, has been carefully esti- 

 mated from official records, at 120 days. The above 

 rate of flow will deliver during such period three 

 acre feet of water on each acre of land. This in 

 general is sufficient for alfalfa, the ordinary crop 

 requiring the greatest amounts of water. 



Much difficulty is encountered in defining and 



