The Imperial press., 1904-11-19

The irrigation history of the Golden State as scanned ln the pOndrrOus tonnes of the recorded water suits ai d counter suits, should be proof conclusive that | public ownership of water and irriga- ton systems iz the only true and just solution of the problems confronting the people of the desert. Given the 1 right to establish title tO the snOws and rains on the mountains and public lands | far removed from the scene of final use ! the public, the real owners, are sub- | jectcd to injustice that 80 long as con- tinued will, as In the past, be most pro- | life of neighbOrhOOd wars and legal battles between the assumed water own CTS and the actual land owners. Not withstanding the admitted necessity for irrigation through very large DOT ton ot the West and the entire South west opposition to both private and na- tional enterprise has not been wanting. Unaccountable prejudice tO this method of agriculture may answer for some small part of this: ignorance of natural laws for more, but, in the main the prevailing influences against irrigation enterprises lies more in the desire for great possessions, "bonanza" wheat farms and "bonanza" orchards, the spirit of which has from early history dominated Ifl these states of vast en- terprlses. Especially IS this true Of Cal ifornia.
 Given the capacity for organization, a man can guide successfully the interests of thousands of acres as easily as of tens. Seed time and harvest, with an almost total lack of detail and alto gethcr without the constantly recurring petty incidents ot general farming the "bonanza farmer" rules all agricult- ural principality in which the furrows are measured by the mile and, in the two seasons, the working subjects are counted by the hundreds. Spectacu- ; lar and effective though it be, it has rarely proven remunerative in the end. ,
 Irrigation would sound the death knell to the majority of such enter , prises, whether 1t be public or private. |, In the case of public ownership the wise restrictive clause limiting the landed possession of one person to l6O acres, that clause that most truly conduces to the public veal, and makes of the nat ional law a national blessing, interven,s. In the case of private enterprise the cost per acre checked against the many thousands would prove too great. Too many of the irrigation projects planned { and partially constructed Tn the past, both in California and in Arizona, have been outlined on too large d scale to ad- init of success and opposition to these has not been unreasonable. Inasmuch as irrigation meant revolution Tn methods of agriculture and involved either immense outlay to prepare the great estates for water, or their division and subdivision, and with but few financially able to retain their lands in whole under the new conditions the opposition was but natural in view of the acquired prejudice against small farms.
 All conditions favored small projects that might Xpand as the feasi sibility and best methods ot construction ana nt ap- pllcatWi could have been determined. such enterprises would today show a far greater area of arid and semi-arid lands under intensive cultivation in the southwestern states and territories than is now shown, and where the wTecks of great enterprises and the ruin of un- numbered hopes are now traced by half obitemted, windswept furrows would be counted thousands of happy and con tented households.
 Another cause uf failure in privately capitalized aud managed irrigation sys- trms lies in the segregation of lrriga-