LOSSES FROM CANALS RV SEEPAGE. 2Q 
Almost a year later the same section gave a loss only one- 
half as much, the change being ascribed to the silting which 
had taken place in the meantime. 
The use of sediment is the most practicable method of 
reducing the loss from seepage. In California both the 
main ditches and the laterals are often cemented, as they 
are in Mexico. Their canals are much smaller than the 
canals in Colorado, the value of water is much greater, and 
hence the amount which could be expended for the saving 
of water would be greater than could be profitably expended 
under Colorado conditions. 
On some California canals the channels have been lined 
by cementing directly on the earth. This would not be pos- 
sible to do successfully under the colder winters of Colorado. 
Under some conditions, as where water is exceptionably 
valuable, it may become profitable to go to considerable ex- 
pense to save the loss from seepage; to pave the sides or 
bottom if necessary, to concrete the canal through in our 
climate this is not likely to be satisfactory, or to pipe the 
ditch. 
Evidently the question returns to the value of water 
and the amount of loss. The commercial value of a cubic 
foot per second of water is not less than $500 in any place 
in the state, and in few places would it be considered as 
high as $3,000. This is the nominal second-foot which 
actually is not constant in flow. Under farming conditions 
$1,200 would probably represent the average value. The 
annual value may be considered as not less than $50. To 
the farmer using the water its productive value is far more; 
or the individual who uses the water can profitably expend 
more than any one else. 
The farmer who could thus save as much as 2 cubic feet 
per second could afford to expend $100 per year if neces- 
sary for that purpose. But until fully convinced of the effi- 
cacy of methods of saving water, few would care to risk so 
much. 
In many cases the losses are excessive. Under fair con- 
ditions they be as much as two feet per day. 
The losses vary with the different formations through 
which the canal passes, or the different character of the soil. 
Porous gravels are notoriously leaky, while the clayey soils, 
or gravel with a suitable admixture of finer material and 
clay, may hold water satisfactorily. In some cases the sec- 
tion of the channel can be enlarged at the leaky place and 
filled with finer material, or silt allowed to settle, for in most 
