The Florence tribune., 1899-09-02
Free irrigation ?
IFrom the Los Angeles Times.l

pleased to term ''irrigation at public expense" advances some plausible arguments againt the irrigation of the arid lands of the United States under government auspices. These argu- ments, though plausible, are one sided and untenable. They are made frcm the standpoint, or the imaginary I standpoint, of the eastern farmer, and it is assumed that he will necessarily be injured by the development of the arid regions of the Great West. It is l further assumed that the government will. Of necessity, he put to enormous expense in the bringing of these arid lands under irrigation. The article proceeds as follows
 Naturally the people of the semi arid regions of the West. and those who are prepared to settle in those, or the arid regions, are favorable to. gov ernment appropriations for irrigation. as is indicated by the writer of spe cial article. Just as naturally farmers in other sections, East, South. and West, are bitterly opposed to the idea. They oppose it because they are con vineed they could not compete in any 1 market with the farmer who has his lands irrigated free.
 Agriculture in the arid and semi arid regions, with irrigation, is the ideal of farming. Crops are as nearly under control ss-it is possible to have them. Much better results can be ex- l pected than where.rainfall has to be depended upon for moisture, and there is never any washing away of the rich soil from the surface. Of course, if the water must bo paid for, it will ab- sorb the surplus profit, but if the gov ernment gives-those regions free irri- gation they will be able to produce much more cheaply than the rural re- gions of Pennsylvania or Ohio.
 "This country is an exporter of sgri- cultural products, and it is claimed that while this,is.so it would be un- just for the government to irrigate lands tc. create q surplus production, thereby lowering prices or driving less fortunate farmers out. of business. It Is conceded by all that Irrigation viil ultimately. ulaEe the arid wastes pfo- anctises but 1t isergued. not without Justies, that private enterprise will provide the necessary works as rapidly as 8 aarlset is developed for the addi- tional product. This view is not agree able to those who are interested in having their lands irrigated at public expense but it is likely to pre- vail on acconnt of the vested interests in lands not irrigated and the private capital already invested in irrigation reservoirs, canals and artesian wells. D
 In this last sentence the Pittsburgh paper seemsto be laboring under the total delusion that present owners of } arid lands-lands not public or unap- ) propriated-are asking and expecting government irrigation for their hold ings. Nothing could be further from the truth. Isis the arid public lands for which irrigation is. advocated, in :. order that they. may be made fit for production, sold at proper prices to intending settlers, and made by their labor to s'blossom as the rose," the government thus. recouping itself for : all it's original expenditures, and at the same time doing vast general good.
 The assumption that the govern ment would lose large amount of money through the irrigation of the arid lands at public expense is gratui- '. tous. The initial cost of the under taking it is quite true, would be heavy. But the government would be able to secure quick; reimbursement for all its expenditures in this direction by the sale of the lands to settlers al l. prices greatly in excess of those which n the lands would bring without irriga- ton.
 In point of fact, the greater propro. tion of these lands, are practically worthless without water for irrigation and water for irrigation can be ob
 tained only by the establishment o! extensive and comprehensive irriga
 tion systems, the magnitude of whicl is quite beyond the grasp of privat, enterprise, and which are possible only under some general system di
 reeted and controlled by the nationa
 government, exercising the right O
 eminent domain, and controlling tn, sources of supply and the avenues o distribution. Government irrigation il
 preferable to irrigation under privat, ? auspices, principally for the reason / that government irrigation could be in
 augurated on scale of magnitude ans
 conprehensiveness impossible to pri q vate' enterprise, even under the mos U favorable conditions conceivable.