THE IRRIGATION AGE. 



89 



big bond issues on a vast territory in which they 

 themselves had little financial interest. This was 

 about what happened in the Central irrigation dis- 

 trict near Willows and the continued opposition of 

 large landowners finally killed the district after 

 many miles of canal had been built. The law has 

 since been changed to require a majority of the 

 acreage as well, which is the same as the Idaho 

 law ; hence the point to be made is that where the 

 sentiment of the community favors development 

 by irrigation, obstructing land owners can be forced 

 into line and their holdings forced into an agricul- 

 ture more beneficial to the public good, as was the 

 case with Modesto and Turlock districts, but where 

 the real sentiment of the community is opposed to 

 such development, it has in certain cases proven 

 to be a mistake for the minority to go over the heads 

 of the majority interests. 



6. In Some States, Works Exempt from Taxation 



Some states provide that rights of way, ditches, 

 reservoirs, etc., and other property of like charac- 

 ter belonging to any irrigation district shall not be 

 taxed for state, county or municipal purposes. In 

 Idaho such a law is not necessary as Sub. 12 of 

 Section 1644, Idaho Revised Codes, exempts all 

 public corporate bodies, which, of course, includes 

 irrigation districts as water is used by the owners ; 

 if water were sold or rented, the property could then 

 be assessed. 



7. Public Lands Bear Their Share of Cost 



Under the terms of the Smith bill passed by 

 Congress at its last session, provision is made for 

 the inclusion of public lands and their sharing of 

 the expense of the project after the district has been 

 approved as a feasible proposition by the secretary 

 of the interior. The Government cannot be held for 

 assessments, but it is provided that entered or un- 

 entered government land may be included and en- 

 tered land sold for taxes, and before patent is issued 

 proof must be made of the payment of all the dis- 

 trict assessments in full to date. 



One factor which in the past has been the 

 cause of the failure of many irrigation districts, 

 has been the large acreage of public land within 

 the district which bore no part of the expense of 

 the project. This situation will be alleviated where 

 any public land is entered in the future in any dis- 

 tricts which are meritorious enough to secure the 

 approval of the Interior Department. The owner 

 of private land will thus have his burden eased to 

 that extent, and the entryman upon public land will 

 be required to contribute to the cost of the system, 

 which has enhanced the value of his land, whether 

 he uses district water or not ; in other words the 

 fact of his securing land from the Government in- 

 stead of from private individuals, will give him no 

 advantage in his relation to the irrigation district. 



8. State Lands May Pay Their Share 



The Idaho Law (Sec. 2439) provides that the 

 State Board of Land Commissioners may contract 

 with the irrigation district to pay to such districts 

 the full benefit accruing to state lands within the 

 district, as determined by the state engineer and 

 the state board. 



This means that the state lands, whether en- 

 tered or unentered, may contribute their propor- 

 tionate cost of a meritorious project, provided such 



projects be an irrigation district, with the result that 

 private land owners are not required to carry all the 

 burden themselves. 



9. Cooperation with United States Reclamation 



Service 



Most of the irrigation district laws of the sev- 

 eral western states provide for co-operation with 

 the United States reclamation service. 



The gist of these provisions is that a district 

 may contract with the reclamation service for the 

 latter to build the irrigation system for the district 

 at the Government's expense, the district depositing 

 bonds with the government as a pledge for repay- 

 ment of the cost without interest or merely con- 

 sidering the contract as a lien for repayment with- 

 out any bond issue. The argument in favor of this, 

 is that whatever may have been the mistakes of the 

 reclamation service in the past, it is now a corps of 

 highly trained irrigation engineers with much ex- 

 perience in irrigation construction behind them, and 

 irrigation districts are given legal authority to se- 

 cure the service of this organization for the actual 

 cost of construction to be repaid over a series of 

 years. The service has accordingly constructed 

 systems for several districts in the Yakima Valley, 

 Washington. Another feature of co-operation with 

 the reclamation service is the reorganization of 

 water users' associations into irrigation districts. 



There are many arguments in favor of such a 

 change and most of them can be found in an article 

 by Mr. E. H. Burr and Judge King in the Reclama- 

 tion Record ; Mr. Burr having been assigned to the 

 special task of arranging for such reorganization 

 and having consequently given the subject con- 

 siderable study. The Sunnyside Water Users' As- 

 sociation in Yakima Valley, Washington, has gone 

 on record as approving such a change. 



10. Enables Landowners to Take Advantage of 



the Federal Farm Loan Act 

 By the terms of the Federal Farm Loan Act, no 

 loan can be made on land on which there is a prior 

 mortgage. It has been held, however, that the lien 

 for bonds of an irrigation district is not to be con- 

 sidered a mortgage in this case. Of course, in 

 making the loan the board will consider the bonded 

 indebtedness in determining how much of a loan 

 the land is good for, but it is not prohibited from 

 making the loan because of such bond lien. This 

 is an advantage which a private company with its 

 construction cost secured by individual mortgages 

 cannot claim, and operates distinctly in favor of 

 the landowners in an irrigation district. 



I might say here that there is a mvoement on 

 foot now to secure legislation which will very ma- 

 terially benefit the irrigation districts. We are de- 

 sirous of a law which will enable bankers of the 

 state to use irrigation district bonds as security for 

 state, county, city and school district funds depos- 

 ited in the banks. Under the present law (Sec. 2017, 

 Vol. 1, Civil Code) such funds placed in banks by 

 the treasurer of the state or municipality making 

 the deposit must be secured by the bank, by the 

 giving of a bond for the return of the money or by 

 the deposit with the state or municipality of certain 

 securities which are construed to include bonds and 

 obligations of the United States, the District of 

 Columbia, State of Idaho, counties of the state, 

 cities, villages, town and school districts; warrants 



