200 



THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



LOS ANGELES' $40,000,000 WHITE ELEPHANT 



By F. C. FINKLE, 



M. Am. Soc. M, E., M. Am. M. W. Assoc., AMOC M. Am. I. E. E. and Consulting Engineer, 

 448-449 I. W. Hellman Building, Los Angeles. Cal. 



THE city of Los Angeles is the only one, so far as 

 there is a record, which has entered upon the busi- 

 ness of constructing an irrigation project. Not only 

 has the city actually constructed such a project at a 

 cost somewhere between $35,000,000 and $40,000,000, 

 but it has been built for the purpose of irrigating lands, 

 which were not a part of the city at the time the project 

 was undertaken, and which are not even yet within 

 the city limits. 



One of the most disgraceful things connected with 

 the proposition is that the U. S. Reclamation Service, 

 through F. H. Newell, its former director, allowed the 

 Los Angeles speculators to use this branch of the 

 government service to lull the people of Owens Valley 

 to sleep by promising them a reclamation project. Mr. 

 J. B. Lippincott, 

 then of the serv- 

 ice, went to the 

 valley, ostensibly 

 for the purpose of 

 inaugurating the 

 project, and 

 turned the whole 

 thing over to the 

 Los Angeles land 

 speculators, here- 

 inafter mentioned, 

 when the neces- 

 sary preliminary 

 work had been 

 done and rights 

 secured for a re- 

 clamation project. 

 For this Mr. Lip- 

 pincott was re- 

 warded by receiv- 

 ing the appointment as assistant chief engineer by the 

 city of Los Angeles and a derogatory Biblical nick- 

 name from the people of Owens Valley. 



When it was proposed to build the Los Angeles 

 aqueduct, the public were informed that this was for 

 the purpose of providing a future municipal water 

 supply. Most people accepted this statement at its 

 face value at the time, and the good faith of the city 

 water department in advocating this project was not 

 questioned. However, there were some people who 

 had studied the question of water supply for Los An- 

 geles, or who were informed as to what was going on 

 by reason of being engaged in work which made a 

 study of such problems obligatory. These people, al- 

 though comparatively few in number, looked into the 

 matter and charged those in control of the Los Angeles 

 water department with bad faith. 



The following are the charges made at fhe time : 



First : That the way had been paved for the in- 

 auguration of the aqueduct project by causing an arti- 

 ficial water famine in the city of Los Angeles. 



Second. That the lands within the city, or those 

 adjacent there to, over which the future growth of the 

 urban population would extend, were mostly irrigated 



and the water used for such irrigation would be ample 

 for domestic purposes. 



Third : That the project was inaugurated by Fred 

 Eaton, in his own interest, to acquire large holdings 

 of land in Owens Valley without cost to himself, such 

 land to be paid for by the city of Los Angeles and given 

 to Mr. Eaton. 



Fourth: That Mr. Eaton had secured the support 

 of the local press for the project by demonstrating to 

 the proprietors of the leading local newspapers, that 

 they could make millions of dollars profit from the 

 proposed aqueduct, as it would really be an irrigation 

 system, capable of irrigating thousands of acres of 

 land, which could be acquired very cheaply before the 

 details of the scheme became public. 



In support of 

 the first charge 

 it was shown that 

 for a year or two 

 preceding the an- 

 nouncement of the 

 aqueduct project, 

 Los Angeles had 

 suffered from a 

 scarcity of water. 

 The lakes in the 

 parks had been 

 allowed to be- 

 come low or en- 

 tirely dry, the 

 streets were not 

 adequately 

 sprinkled, the 

 sewers were not 

 flushed, people 

 were forbidden to 

 sprinkle their lawns, except at stated times, and a gen- 

 eral cry as to the scarcity of water was raised by the 

 water works superintendent. 



The representations thus made had their effect 

 on the community, which became well nigh panic 

 stricken. Therefore when the aqueduct project was 

 proposed, there was little disposition on the part of 

 anyone to question what was recommended. Many 

 people, who were well informed on the water question, 

 made the charge that the water famine was due to 

 two things, namely, the willful wasting of water in 

 order to create a scarcity ; and neglect to install meters 

 on the consumers who were causing unreasonable and 

 reckless waste. The facts would seem to bear out 

 both of these contentions. 



*In 1904 the average flow of the Los Angeles 

 river during the summer was 42.82 second feet, or 

 about 28,000,000 gallons daily. The population was 

 150.000 in round numbers. This was the water famine 

 year, when it was claimed that the supply was grossly 

 insufficient, even for domestic purposes, and char- 



*Fourth annual report of the Board of Water Commissioners of 

 the City of Los Angeles, page 26 and page 36. 



"Josephine," one of the money makers of the Logan herd at Mulvane, Kansas. 



