New-York tribune., 1912-01-30
REPORT FRIENDLY TO
WATER POWER TRUST
Suggestions on Storage in Line
with What Interests Believe
WiSeSt Course.
NO COMPETITION WITH STATE
Commonwealth Would Store and
Sell Water So That Only Ripar-
ian Owners Along Important
Streams Could Buy 1t.
rBy Telegraph to The Tribune.

tBy Telegraph to The Tribune
Albany, Jan 29-The joint legislative conf
mittee appointed last year to investigate
and report on problems of water storage
presented its report to the Legislature to-
night. Though novel In many respects to
the point of being revolutionary. it's sug-
restions should not displcase that portion
Of the public commonly called the water
power trust" Most os the novel sugges-
tions nd the point of view of the commit
tee seem entirely I'm line with what the
water power interests believe TO he their
Uisost. safest and most profitable course In
view OF the generally awakened interest In
conservation of tho states natural re-
sources for the benefit Of tho state.
II the committees scheme OF conservation
Of water should become the policy OF the
! state the power companies would practically
| be forever protected from state competition
| in the marketing of power. The state
| would not develop power and sell it, II
would store water and sell that to the
| power people. Moreover, II would store and
market this water under such conditions
that only tho riparian owners-that Is. the
present water power interests, along Inn
| portant streams-could be the customers OF
! tho state
This committee finds insuperable oh
stacles TO the state condemnng the pres
ent rights OF the riparian owners, which 1t
acknowledges at the estimate Of them
| formed by the riparian owners IL finds
| n constitutional bar to the state improv-
| ing the watersheds by building storage res
! ervolrs and taxing the costs on the owners
benefited. with a sufficient additional tax
to represent n profit to the state on the
undertaking. And the committee generous
" insists that. whatever conservation
scheme is worked out. there must he some
profit 10 tho state. At the same time 1t
recognizes tho existing riparian owners
rights TO whatever increased flow Of
streams should result from water storage
at the hcadwaters OF the streams right
which cXponents OF tho conservation theory
for state benefit have never conceded. On
this assumption the committees plan goes
ahead to reckon some profit to tho state
and some benefit from the giving up by the
riparian owners Of rights which they claim
and tho committee comedies, but which
many lawyers and conservationlsts never
! have conceded. Tho committee declines TO
discuss at any length the development OF
water storage within the forest preserve.
where all rights unquestionaby would be-
| long 20 tho state. and handles cursorily the
| question OF power 10 be obtained from tho
surplus waters OF the canal. save that II
recommends that such power, IL developed
| by the state. be sold at the current mar
! ket rates"
Hearings at Many Places.
This committee was appointed last year.
on It arc Edward A. Merritt. jr.. now
Speaker Of tho Assembly. who is interested
in water power development along the
Rauuette River; Senator Ferris. OF Utica;
Senator'S Long and walters and Messrs.
Donnelly. Gregg. Hocy and Patrie. Ar
thur J. Baldwin. Of Griggs. Baldwin &
Baldwin acted as It's counsel It's report
was based on the conclusions Of the com
mittee on hearings At Lake George. Water
town. Syracuse. Rochester. Buffalo. Albany
and New York. At these hearings repre-
sentatives OF tho water power interests tes-
tilted extensively. Clifford Pinchot set forth
tho Views of conservation held by tho eX-
tremists and told Of his own observations
| I'm New York State
According TO legislation enacted in 1907,
| this state IS committed TO the progressive
development OF the water powers OF the
state under state ownership. control and
maintenance for the public use and benefit
and for the increase Of tho public revenue"
Tho committee points out that there Is
widespread misconception Of the actual
rights Of the state of New York in and TO
the undevclopcd water power OF the state"
| II classihes the undeycloped water power
/ into four divisions.
| T. Power that may be developed from the
| surplus waters OF tho canals where there is
| no question as TO tho states title.
| .. Power that can be produced from In
| teTnatiOnal boundary streams where there
can bo no diversion for power purposes
| without tho consent of tho state. and whore
the title TO the bed of the stream Is In the
| state.
power development where the title 20 the
power sites along the various inland
! streams, Is in private owners. including
such power as Is capable Of development at
! the foot OF any conservation reservoir that
! may be constructed
! t. Power capable of development at power
! sites located on streams within the forest
preserve, where tho title is vested In the
! state.
| TO the third class the committee gives
most of it's attention and states the prob
| llm in this fashion,:
| Should the state 90 into the business OF
manufacturing and sclliHS ELECTRICAL en-
/ crgy? Should such business be carried on
! In competition with that Of It's own citizens?
! Should the rights that have been given by
| tho state without reservation be regarded
| as property rights? Should the state carry
1 out these great projects without profit other
! than tho increased prosperity OF It's citzens.
or should II derive direct revenue?
Flow Of Streams Force Of Nature.
Regarding the rights OF the individual
| riparian owner the committee argues that
the flow of streams Is force of nature
| equally with fertility OF the soil and sun
light and there is just as much reason
for claiming that the people In their SOW
! ercign capacity own the sunshine and the
breeze that blows as there Is for claiming
| that they own tho power developed by the
| riparian owner upon that portion Of the
earth over which, by our system OF laws,
he is guaranteed free and full possession"
The committee assumes that tho riparian
owner would have equal rights In whatever
| additional power he could derive from the
regulated flow OF the stream following the
| building by the state of storage reservoir
at the hcadwatcrs. and adds:
rrhe energy thus developed would belong
! to the riparian owner and not to the
state. and the only way the state could
acquire this vast power made possible py
the building of these conservation resor-
yoirs would be by condemnation OF the
power sites Of the riparian owners. there
by destroying the usefulness of the various
Enterprises that line the streams OF our
state This procedure would involve the
state I'm an enterprise requiring untold
millions. "
Your committee, therefore beneYcs mat
whatever water power Is developed by the
state. n In recommended by this report.
should he sold at current market rates ana
not I'm competition. and that the revenues
go derived should be used for cssenlng the
hurdnns OF taNation OF tho pconlc. We