The Churchill county standard. (Fallon, Nev.) 1908-1920, 1914-11-11
BENEFITS OF EXTENSION ACT
New Laws Great Benefits Entitled
to Approval. Added Benefits
Shown BY the Following.

From some source there has
been circulated amongst water
users a rumor that by accepting the
terms of the Reclamation Extension
Act water users pledge themselves
to pay an increased construction
charge This is not true in any
sense. The only effect of signing
the Reclamation Extension Act, in
sofar as it relates to your present
contracts, Is to extend the time of
payments thereon for 20 years and
to make it possible for you, ishould
ii become necessary in order to pro-
teet your land and property TO
consent to additional expenditures
for drainage or other construction
purposes, without compelling you TO
work is completed.
The necessity for requiring the eX-
eeution of acceptances of the Recla-
nation Extension Act was foreseen
by the congress in order to make
this law effective. Otherwise its eff
feet would have been to impair the
obligation of your contract, making
it unconstitutional and therefore in
effective
As the law now stands, without
the Reclamation Extension Act, any
construction expenditures made sub
seqnent to the contract in which the
price of the water right is agreed
upon can only be recovered by the
reclamation fund through charges
made against the annual operation
and maintenance cost, in the guise
of Improvements or betterments.
II the cost of a drainage system,
for example. is charged to the op-
Grafton and maintenance expense
OF one irrigation season and this
expense constitutes (as in some cases
it has) an average of IS per acre,
the result is to impose on the water
Iser-1 charge that is greater than
he cam afford to pay in one Install
ment. II the installation of such a
.raGade system is proceeded with
eonrna3 the water users can afford
sto P~y ior it, and Il they can afford
20 w ahiy an average of 500 per
racrsues annum for this purpose,
Ahe1uha construction of the drain
Dee lxetlm is delayed for 5 years.
UrMr lthe terms of the Reclama-
lon Extension Act, the entire
01ain~<e | system may be put in,
ken thotgh it costs $40 or more
nj aTs p do SCI in one irrigation
%sofAnd the cost of such system
- bB distributed over the 20
yssIs eobcident with other con-
s1fsctiol- l-eLarges; or, if The Secre-
taafy in his discretion desires 10 do
so, it may be distributed over the
several years beginning at the end
of the first 20-year period during
which the construction charges are
being paid.
The above statement is made IN
order to remove from your mind
any belief that it is the purpose of
the Secretary of the Interior or of
the Reclamation Commission to
fasten upon you an obligation to pay
more for your water right than
your present contract calls for.
The boards of review which have
been proposed for the purpose of re-
vising the costs of the various pro-
jects are intended to afford the
water users of all the projects an
opportunity to review the items
which have been charged against
the cost of their irrigation system,
to enable them to object to the in
clusion therein of any items which
they think are unfair or unreason-
able charges against such system.
The proposal to appoint such a
Board came from the water users
themselves and was initially based
upon the theory that such a review
I in lanFnaund n %
But the insidious rumOr has been
circulated amongst the water users
that the purpose of this Board of
Review is to fasten upon them a
| higher charge. This cannot be done.
1t may be that on some of the pro-
/ jects the cost has been determined
/ by this Board of Review will be
| found to be greater than that named
in the contracts, and in the public
notices heretofore issued. In such
case, the doubt will be forever dis
PEELED from the mind of the water
user that he has been overcharged
or is paying a higher construction
charge than he should have paid,
/ but the increased charge above that
provided in existing contracts, cam
not be collected without the con-
sent of the water users. 1t is prob
able however that in most cases the
review will result either in deereas-
ing the charges, or leaving them as
| they are.
The water user in executing an
acceptance TO the Reclamation Ex-
tension Act does not bind himself
to vote in favor of an increased
charge, nor does he bind himself to
pay any greater sum than that
called for in his contract. He does,
however, by signing the acceptance,
make it possible TO apply the terms
of this act to his land and the adj
vantages of this act are many. For
instance, il viii no longer be proper
to charge to operation and mainte-
nance cost such items as improve
ments or betterments. 1t will not
be possible to undertake any large
supplemental construction work on
the project without the consent of
the water users.