The Churchill county standard. (Fallon, Nev.) 1908-1920, 1915-12-29
correspondent SUGGESTS
A SURVEY OF Project
Says Settlement is Only % Per Cent
Efficient and Offers Real CO.
operation as Solution

Ed. Standard. School surveys
are at present all the rage. The
school system and its workings is
critically reviewed and the results
checked up. Often much needed
reforms or improvements are under
taken.
In just such manner do we most
urgently need a Project Survey of
our Truckee-Carson project. First
of all, in order that other subjects
can be taken up with care, the op-
Grafton and maintenance of the pro-
ject should be examined, studied
and understood Al present /.
stands in the way of any sane
thought on any other subject at all
| venture to say that increasing ef-
ficsene, OF work in this line will be
disclosed. | will not venture TO say
that further efficiency and saving
be expected every year with man
agement looking for il. BY all
means let US understand o. & NJ.
and make any recommendation for
further efficiency that it might ap-
pear we're not already being effect
ed.
With this understood and settled.
let US turn TO our project as a
whole. We want successful pro-
ject, one with valuable land and one
operated and maintained efficiently
and cheaply. How are we to get
it?
First of all we need an efficient
project and we haven't got it. We
have $4,000 acres being irrigated
and we have over 100000 acres that
should be. We therefore have 25
per cent efficiency, for we have
dams and canals and caretakers
and an organization for the full
100000 acres. Just think of it
only % per cent efficiency, but new
er a word about it by those criticiz
ing operations and our progress.
We can increase to 100000 acres
and take on only a few ditch rid
ers to do il. The costs would in
crease probably less than rs per
cent. yet our acreage bearing charg-
es would iEoFease 100 per cent. Our
charges, instead OF being perhaps
less than 81 on the acreage should
be 60 cents.
In other words completion and
settlement of the project should re-
duce our charges 40 per cent. Isn't
1t worth working for? How shall
we get it?
We will get 1t by not driving out
the settler that is coming in Some
tell me that they only have TO tell
the prospective settler of the fright
ful o. q NJ. charge and he beats"
IT, But is this SO? Our settlers are
coming from California and they
pay mostly from SO up for mainte-
nance over there. instead of less
than a dollar as here. The o. q
NJ of this project is considerably
less than the average of all our rec
lamation projects This should be
investigated and understood and
when proved it should be used to
advertise us.
Then to get more settlers let the
project survey study our drainage
situation. Some s250.0o0 will be
made available TO this project for
drainage and of that sum $4,000
has been subject to check for the
past twelve months TO start 1t on.
The service made proposal and II
was turned down, but then no
counter proposal was made by our
numerous water users associations,
nor was the matter even discussed
tentatively. Meanwhile that $40,-
900 has lain idle and a year has
gone by. We have the opportunity
to get deep drainage and have gold
bond insurance of a highest class
project to advertise to settlers. But
we are content TO sit still and puff
the pipe of Incidence. Some places
in Utah have gone 100 per cent al
kali. Apparently many are willing
to let the project stay a 500 an
~.~~~~~~~-~-~~~~~~---~