IRRIGATION DISTRICT OPERATION AND FINANCE. 17 
irrigable or of nonirrigable land have been established and differ- 
ent benefits assigned. In several cases where districts took over 
existing systems embraing tracts upon which only partial water- 
right payments have been made, the unpaid amounts were added to 
a flat rate per acre in determining the amount of benefits to assess 
against such tracts. In at least one instance of drainage construc- 
tion by an irrigation district two classes of benefits were assessed, one 
amount against lands directly benefited and the other against lands 
indirectly benefited. Adjustments for preexisting partial water rights 
and seepage conditions have also been made by this method. 
According to water allotment. — In Utah, prior to district formation, 
a determination is made by the State engineer of the maximum 
amounts of water which may be beneficially used upon each 40-acre 
tract, or smaller tracts if in separate ownership, in the proposed dis- 
trict, which allotment, as finally revised after organization when the 
amount of water available has been determined, is the basis for all 
assessments and tolls. In actually making such allotment existing 
water rights are listed, soil and subsoil classified, depth to ground 
water measured, and the water ./deficiency ascertained. 
Comparison of methods of assessment. — A certain amount of flexi- 
bility in determining the proper amounts to be assessed against dis- 
trict lands is obtainable by either the ad valorem or the benefit 
method. Theoretically the ad valorem method might seem to require 
a rigid application, yet in actual practice the district assessors have 
frequently departed widely from a strict interpretation of the law, 
even to the extent in some cases of valuing all farm lands in the dis- 
trict year after year at the same rate per acre. The ad valorem 
principle does not readily lend itself, however, even under a liberal 
interpretation, to the organization into an irrigation district of a 
community in which varying degrees and values of water rights 
already exist, unless the district is prepared to purchase such rights, 
nor to a community composed of distinct units requiring radically 
different construction costs. The method of assessing according to 
benefits is designed to take care of varying local needs and conditions. 
Greater adaptability in determining benefits is of course possible 
where the apportionment is made annually, or where a reapportion- 
ment is permitted in particular cases in subsequent years, than where 
the allotment of benefits is made only once for all time. 
On the other hand, the two opposite extreme views on assessment 
are represented by the methods of assessing at the same rate per acre 
and according to acre-feet of water allotted, neither of which would 
seem to allow of deviation from the fixed rule. The one view is that 
the irrigation district is a unit in its community of interest, involving 
equal benefits to all lands, with the result that each acre should bear 
a share of the burden equal to that of every other acre. The other 
idea is that the quantity of water received from the district is the 
measure of interest each tract has in the district, and that a tract 
receiving 4 acre-feet per acre is benefited twice as much as one 
entitled to 2 acre-feet per acre. Both Oregon and Montana, as above 
stated, have recently permitted modifications of the uniform rate 
plan. The Utah plan of assessing according to water allotments has 
been in force since 1917 only and has not yet been sufficiently tried 
out in extreme cases to warrant conclusions as to its operation. 
50488°— 23 3 
