DRAINAGE DISTRICT ASSESSMENTS. 37 
In the average drainage district where no flood protection is a Horded we have 
arbitrarily adopted a value of S200 per mile as representing the benefit to the 
track. This came about through a realization that we could not be entirely 
exempted and represented an amount acceptable to the average fair-minded 
drainage commissioner. It is not based on any figures prepared from data. 
When districts relieve us of flood conditions we usually have something 
definite to work from. For instance, if a certain location included in a district 
is subject to frequent overflow or washout we gather from our monthly flood 
damage reports the actual cost of flood repairs for that location and reduce the 
same to an average annual expenditure on this account. The annual expendi- 
ture then capitalized, usually at 6 per cent, is considered to be the resulting 
benefit if the proposed ditch will prevent future floods. Where numerous 
bridges are maintained through a valley and a drainage ditch makes it possi- 
ble to eliminate some of them, the benefit then becomes the capitalized value 
of the annual cost of maintenance for Che amount of bridging ro bo eliminated, 
less the cosr of elimination. 
A railroad official says that railroads do not get the benefit gen- 
erally ascribed for the reason that drainage work is done to benefit 
agriculture, not railroad operation : that assessments should be those 
of adjacent agricultural lands, together with any saving on account 
of decreased maintenance charges from the elimination of trestle? 
and shortening of bridge spans and sometimes from the prevention 
of water overtopping the roadbed. 
The chief engineer of a large railroad system says that drainage 
imjjrovement^ will benefit the railroads in the following cases: 
fli Where water is drained from the sides of fills, especially where the fills 
slough off regardless of the height of the fills: (2) where the removal of tres- 
tles can be safely accomplished: (3) where the drainage system will prevent 
the roadbed from being overtopped with flood water. His road will accept rea- 
sonable assessments made on the following basis: (1) Assessment of right of 
way on an acreage basis at the same rate as adjacent farm lands; (2) benefit 
from the removal Of trestles (capitalize the saving in maintenance and deduct 
the cost of making the fill) : (3) benefit of lowering the water table (lowering 
the water table a certain distance is the same as adding the same number of 
feet to the fill. Where the water table is within four feet of the rail the 
roadbed is always a source of trouble) : (4) incidental benefits: (a) drying up 
adjacent lands removes muskrats. which burrow in the fills and cause settling: 
i h I general health benefits. 
He point? out that it is impossible for railroads to give assessors 
any help in arriving at the amounts of these savings and benefits 
except in the matter of benefit due to elimination of bridging, be- 
cause the costs of the various items are not separated in their records 
of operating expenses. 
The chief engineer of another system, which has had experience 
with several hundred drainage districts along its lines, says that the 
only benefit which the railroad can receive is such as will decrease 
the cost of maintaining the structures. The fact that there may be 
continuous moisture or standing water on the right of way does not 
imply that there will be any benefit to the railroad after the water 
is removed. 
We do not find any appreciable benefit in lowering the water table below 
about 3 feet from the rail. Underground drains, therefore which d^ not 
carry surface water except as it percolates into the ground very rarely 
resulr in any bonefit to the railroad structure. In general, of course, open 
ditches, channel rectification, and that class of improvements which facilitate 
the flow of surface water are likely to have more beneficial results, although in 
these cases there is benefit in only a portion of the improvements Where the 
railroad track is well above any highwater mark and has provided sufficient 
bridge openings any rectification of channels is ordinarily of no benefit. 
