46 



THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



all means of participating in them? I do not know 

 what the experience of others may have been, but 

 personally I have received, in the three years suc- 

 ceeding the "Big Lost River" failure, but one docu- 

 ment bearing upon the situation -that one a 

 letter from the receiver under date of February 1, 

 1912. For such information as I have received I 

 am indebted to officials of the Land Board, in reply 

 to personal letters of inquiry and to the press of Idaho. 

 If the "Big Lost" is nothing more than a ''business 

 transaction" of "caveat emptor" import then lei 

 business ethics prevail and let the State, which has 

 sold its land with the implied guarantee that its con- 

 tractor would perform certain acts necessary to give 

 this property value, assume ( ?) liability towards 

 its vendee for its failure to enforce the provisions 

 of its contract. Thus might one argue from the 

 narrow standpoint. 



It is my conception, however, that a broader 

 view should prevail. The Governor asks for 

 thoughtful suggestions and constructive advice and 

 I firmly believe that every man interested should 

 contribute his quota of helpfulness towards any 

 constructive measures undertaken in the future. I 

 cannot, along this line, do much more than offer 

 the very general suggestions advanced in my letter 

 of October. 



As a broad proposition, every one in touch 

 with irrigation development would be disposed to 

 regard financing with private capital as a hopeless 

 undertaking, at this time, but the affairs of "Big 

 Lost River" are so involved and its problems so 

 peculiarly its own that I feel incapable of more 

 than a repetition of the admonition to collect on the 

 construction bond to complete the project with 

 State funds, directly,, or to assist whatever private 

 parties are finally, awarded the equities left, with 

 the State's credit, as suggested by Mr. Guen- 

 ther in the Financial World. Barring these avenues, 

 there is yet one other road to travel cooperation 

 with the Federal Government. The new policy has 

 been adopted in the sister State of Oregon in the 

 investigation of irrigation and power projects and 

 Director Newell is quoted (Capital News, October 

 23), as saying that "Washington is doing the same 

 thing to complete some of the projects in that State 

 and California is to join with the "Service" in com 

 pleting some of the projects." 



There are not wanting advocates of the adop- 

 tion of the "cooperative policy" in Idaho. In its 

 issue of August 21, the Capital News makes a 

 strong plea for its adoption. It has its advocates 

 among land officials of other States as well. The 

 recent agreement between the department of the 

 interior and the administration of Oregon was 

 referred to at length in my article appearing in 

 the ovember AGE entitled "Conservation and Co- 

 operation." In that State (under chapter 87, 

 laws of 1913) the sum of $50,000 was appropri- 

 ated by the State, and like amount allotted by 

 the secretary of the interior for cooperative in- 

 vestigation. The sum of $450,000.00 was appropri- 

 ated (chapter 119, laws of 1913), for the construc- 

 tion of the aforementioned "Tumalo project" 

 where water rights were sold by promoters under 

 the Carey Act to 275 settlers "with the apparent 

 backing of the State," and the supply found inade- 



quate for even the thirty-five settlers who moved 

 upon their land. The secretary of the interior, I am 

 informed, has offered to contribute an equal amount, 

 "which will be sufficient properly to care for all the 

 land in this vicinity of this Carey Act Project." 1 

 commend the legislation upon this subject to the 

 earnest attention of the Governor. In Washington, 

 as I am advised, the legislature at its last session 

 also adopted a law providing for cooperation with 

 the Federal Government in the "Palouse" project. 



To quote the Governor further, "equally grave 

 mistakes may be expected in any new enterprise 

 operated under untried and perhaps insufficient 

 laws, administered by inexperienced officials pio- 

 neering a new field." All very true, and because of 

 the demonstrated failure of some of the States to 

 rise to the demands of the situation, the gospel of 

 "cooperation" with the stable reclamation forces of 

 the National Government is, everywhere, gaining 

 ground. But let us analyze the Governor's apology 

 for the sins of a former administration and with 

 the prefatory remark that the present administra- 

 tion should be held responsible for the former 

 failure only to the extent that its personnel are 

 heirs-at-law, in the natural evolution of biennial 

 changes, to the consequences of former mistakes 

 and misdeeds and must live up to the obligations 

 those imposed upon it. As to Carey Act operations, 

 in 1909 being new enterprises, I cull from the third 

 annual report of the State Land Department (1909) 

 the following: (Page 1): "The last congress 

 granted to Idaho an additional 2,000,000 acres of 

 land under the Carey Act, making a total of 3,000,- 

 000 acres. Up to the time of passing said act, appli- 

 cations had been made to the land board for the 

 segregation of 940,000 acres. Since its passage, 

 additional applications have been filed, making a 

 total of more than 2,300,000 acres. From present 

 indications, balance of the land will be asked to be 

 segregated soon. These projects which have caused 

 more immigration to the State than any other one 

 thing (the italics are mine) are located in the follow- 

 ing counties." "Idaho is far ahead of any other 

 State in the Union in the development of Carey 

 Act lands." Follows the annual report, as required 

 by statute, of twelve Carey Act companies; a list 

 of 22 companies to whom segregations amounting 

 to 1,155,056 acres were granted, a list of 7,857 "en- 

 tries" of 3,316 "final proofs" and of 13 applications 

 for segregation for a total of 1,117,190 acres. This 

 report does not convey the idea of a "new field"- 

 especially in view of the number of "entries" and 

 "final proofs." The very "Big Lost River Irrigation 

 Company" of 1909 was built upon the ruins of the 

 "Big Lost River Land and Irrigation Company." 

 which had contracted with the State in 1907 and had 

 met financial shipwreck all the more reason for 

 safeguarding the reorganized enterprise. Is there 

 any excuse in the face of long-preceding, over- 

 whelming, "development" for either "untried and 

 insufficient laws" or for the "inexperience of offi- 

 cials." The Federal "Carey Act" was adopted in 

 1894 and its two principal amendments in 1896 and 

 1901 respectively. The act whereby the State of 

 Idaho adopted its provisions was passed in 1899. 

 There was no lack of experience or of able counsel 

 to point out legislative amendments prior to 1909. 



