The New York herald., 1922-12-27
Continued from First Page.

the twenty years which have inter-
vened only SAL. .351 .434 has been re-
turned TO the Government, leaving
still due s13O,522,19
The reclamation law grants the
right to spread repayments by settlers
over a period of twenty years. Since
the creation of the reclamation bureau
only two direct appropriations have
been made by Congress for enhancing
the value of privately owned Western
real estate. The aggregate of these
appropriations was s21,000,00
Get Rich Quick Methods.
The promoters of the McNary bill
are using this fact as an argument
to support the pork barrel project
which they are ready to bring forth.
The record of reclamation schemes
for which the Government has adj
vanced money provides a fascinating
study of get rich quick methods.
There is the Salt River project
which has figured in the funny coll
umns and on the vaudeville stage. The
Salt River construction and reclama-
ton scheme is an Arizona contribu-
/ tion to American development. 1t
cost the Government $10,OO0,0O0 The
value of the crops raised during the
last ten years amounted to $1l1,000 :
900 Up to date the promoters of the
Salt River project have returned only
$609.000
Tho Yuma development scheme is
another This cost ss0o0,0o0. The
crops raised on the reclaimed land
reached valuation of $4,000 900. The
Government has received only $780,
600 of its money back.
Other reclamation projects finan ,cd
by the Government are as follows:
Orland (Cal) project cost $1,000
600; crops raised, $4000,000; paid
back to the Government, $16S.00o.
In Colorado the Grand Valley
| project cost over $3,700, 900: value
of crops raised s2o,o0o,oo0; paid
back, nothing.
The Uncompahgre project cost
| s600O,00 crops raised. $22,000,0 900;
| paid back, nothing.
In Idaho the Boise project cost
| s12 900 900; crops raised, $4,000. 900;
/ paid back, $i,099,000.
King Hill project cost s1,400, ,000
crops raised s652,ooo; paid back,
| nothing
Minidoka project cost s6oOo,ooo
crops raised, s31OOo,0oo; paid back.
$2OO0,O0O.
In Montana the Huntley project
cost 81 400, 900; crops raised. $780,
900; returned to the Government,
$4,000.
Milk River project cost s6,500, 900;
crops raised, S1,900000; returned.
nothing.
Sun River project cost $4,000, 900;
crops raised, $1,700,0O0: returned
$12400O.
Yellowstone. cost $3,000,000; crops
raised, s3.600,000; returneds $4,000.
Nebraska, North Platte cost s12.-
000,OO0 crops raised $4,000, 600 ( re-
turned. $1,000.000.
In Nevada the Newland project
cost s6.0OO0O0 crops raised, s10,-
100000; returned, $4S4.000
In New Mexico the Carlsbad prof.
ect cost S1,300,000; crops raised,
$6,000,O0O. returned, 100000.
New Mexico and Texas, Rio
Grande, cost s11.000000; crops
raised, s25, ,00O, 900; returned nothing.
North Dakota pumping project
cost 100000; crops raised, 100000;
returned. nothing
4 In Oregon the Umatilla project
cost S2,700 600; crops raised, $2,700,-
600; returned, 100000.
Oregon California. Klamath, cost
$3,5OO.00O crops raised. $4,000, 900:
returned, s450.000.
Utah. Strawberry Valley, cost s3,-
00O, 900; crops raised $4,000, 900; re-
turned, s300,O0O.
Washington, Okanogan, cost ST.
100000; crops raised. s6.00O.O00; re-
turned, $4,000
Yakima cost S10,000000; crops
raised, s7.700,OO0 in ten years, and
paid back. 81 100000
In Wyoming the Shoshone project
cost s7,000,000; crops raised. ST.
100000; paid back s55S,000.
The South Dakota project cost
$4,000, 900: crops raised. $1,000, 900;
returned to Government, $456,000.