The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-01-14
BALLINGER VS.
 RECLAMATION Serious Charges Are Brought By The
 Engineering
 News" Has the Secretary Sought to Benefit Private COr= porations?=- Has He De- mOralized the U. 5. Re- clamatiOn Service?

sklQln0IlUu CElVltCs 1 As those of our readers who follow 1 the newspapers are aware, the admin istration of the Interior Department
 by Secretary Ballinger is to be inves- i tigated by q joint committee of Con- gress. One Of the bureaus which will doubtless receive the careful attention
 of the Investigating committee is the
 Reclamation Service, Secretary Bal 1 fingers policy toward it, and his in tention, publicly expressed, of making 1 radical changes in it.
 It is hardly necessary to say here that the engineering profession, as a whole, throughout the United States, i takes a peculiar pride in the Reclama- l ton Service. The profession is proud of the Reclamation Service because it l is an object lesson, proving that it is 1 possible to build upon the Government service an eff1cent organization of
 civilian engineers. And this means
 more than the average reader may re- alize.
 i It has been for many years a stock argument against the creation of an | organization of civilian engineers to carry. on our Federal public works l that no such organization could be made efficient. Politics would creep i III urSL, ana SfaIC WOulQ creep III dI- ter it and the organization would soon become honeycombed with corruption. | The success of the Reclamation l Service has been an effective reply to such arguments. It has been demon- strated that the engineering profession 1 is capable of organization for~the eff Ificient conduct of great enterprises; that it is not without executive abil-. l ity to couple with it's technical knowl- edge.
 And it is only giving credit where credit is due to say that the engineer l ing profession and the country is most largely indebted for the success of the Reclamation Service to MT. Frederick H. Newell, it's Director, and
 MT. Arthur P. Davis, its Chief En- gineer.
 The fact is-and we wish to em- phasize it-that the leaders of the Reclamation Service are entitled to quite as much credit for their success 1 in administration as for their success l in solving purely engineering prob Iems. They have not merely had to build dams and canals and tunnels power plants on irrigation projects scattered all the way from Arizona l to Montana. They have had to deal 1 with complicated questions concerning 1 land and water rights. concerning power generation and distribution, concerning the settlement and inn provement of the reclaimed lands. Last, but not least. the Reclamation Service statutes and usages concern ] ing work carried on by the Federal lGovernment, and at the same time has had to steer clear of all the pit falls due to political intrigue and the nachinations of those who seek to use the service improperly to further private business interests.
 Ten years ago irrigation work in : Al VI ,4 .+,x, r1,+f11 NI,<, water in the streams available with out storage had been mostly appro- priated. So many private irrigation companies had come to grief that ir rigation securities were unmarketable. While there were many successful ir-. rigation works in operation, the fail ureS of irrigation companies had been so numerous and so, conspicuous as to wholly discredit irrigation with the in- vesting public.
 Today as a result of the successful work of the Reclamation Service, ir- rigation enterprise has been restored to public confidence, Private concerns are today embarking in irrigation work and are able to market their securities because of the able engin- eering and administrative work of the Reclamation Service. But out of this situation has arisen a certain anta- gonism toward the Reclamation Ser
 
 of the conservation of natural re-
 sources, provided they can conserve the resources to their own profit, are jealous of the Governments irrigation work. And this jealousy is perfectly natural.
 Inevitably, the private irrigation system and the Government projects are in competition The settlers un-
 der Government project have no interest or profits to pay on the mon- ey invested to reclaim their lands. They have not the uncertainties re- garding changes in financial control and their results that the settlers have on a tract reclaimed by a pri-s yate corporation.
 The promoters of private irrigation schemes are restive under this Gov
 ernment competition. They voice demand that the Government should leave the best and most favorable To- cations for irrigation work to them, and confine the Reclamation Service to projects which do not promise any profits.
 But if the Service accepts this and
 undertakes a project where the cost of reclamation is greater than the value of the land after water is ap- piled, settlers will not come in, and the whole project will be failure. |