Ladysmith news-budget. [volume] (Ladysmith, Rusk County, Wis.) 1907-1927, 1922-04-21
TO RECLAIM
CUT-OVER LAND
Plan Started to Divert the Mil
lions Now Going West on
Irrigation Projects, to
Cut-Over Lands of
Wis, Mimi, and
Michigan

nesota and Michigan receive from the
Federal government a portion Of the
hundreds of millions of dollars it is
proposed to appropriate for the expan-
sion of agriculture through land recla-
nation?
That question was discussed at a
meeting at Eau Claire, March 20, and
again at Milwaukee, April II. To date,
a few states in the west have received
from the government the snug sum of
$16S, 100000 for the construction OF
vast dams, tunnels canals and bitches
On % of these projects the government
has spent $93, 157 JOG covering a per-
iod of many years, dating away back
TO 1904, and has received a repayment
of only $2,419,941. 1t is believed that
had this money been spent in the clear
ing of cutover land in our new north
every dollar would have been repaid
to the government with interest. And
here let it be noted that no interest
has been charged on the money invest
ed in western irrigation projects.
For the purpose of placing before
congress and the public the superior
merits of our cutover lands in any rec
lamation plan, the Cut0ver Land Rec
lamation Association was organized in
Milwaukee, April H. It was proposed
to perfect a strong rganiZation-suttl
GENTLY financed and differed to con-
duct vigorous, persistent and success
full campaign, to put our northern cut
over lands on the American map. Here
tofore irrigation has had a monopoly
on reclamation publicity and it is be-
lieved high time that merit be made
the test of selection and the measure
of effort.
The Cutover Reclamation AssOcia-
tiOn is intended to include the states
of Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan
and such cutOver southern states as
may desire to join the movement. 1t
is fact that the states possessing
large areas of cutover land have as
many members in the senate as the
irrigation states and several times as
many in the house of representatives.
1t is anticipated that these senator's
and representatives will insist that a
reasonable portion of future reclama-
tion appropriations shall go to the i'm
prOvement of these lands-nOt in vast
projects as in the WeSt,t with all the
delays and excessive costs of contract
imprOvement-but in direct loans to
settlers actually on the land and in
the work Of developing farms.
This feature of direct aid to settlers
was discussed fully as compared with
the project plan and was unanimously
and enthusiastically endorsed-except
for one protesting voice. The follow
ing are some of the points presented
in favor of the plan for direct aid as
contrasted with the project plan:
Il. No speculation as to land being
used after the government has spent
it's money, as has been the case in the
west.
.. No delay, the settlers being al
ready on the land.
8. No portion of the benefit going to
large landowners. 1.-THE landowners in
the irrigation projects have received an
advantage of several millions of dol
lars.)
4. Direct aid to settlers means
smaller cost to the government, in that
it means only enough advances to
maintain the settlers while clearing
their lands. This in installments as
they clear their land.
5. Direct aid to settlers leaves the
men wanting farms a free choice as
to location, instead, as in the project
plan, having to go upon land selected
by others.
6. Direct aid to settlers means that
the government expenditures would be
measured by the desire of the people
to secure farms.
Z. Direct aid means a better dis
tribution among the communities OF
the various states in the cutover re-
gions.
s. Direct aid to settlers would give
help to tens of thousands of deserving
settlers now in the actual process OF
clearing their farms-these thousands
would be shut out of all benefit under
the project plan.
g. Direct aid to settlers would mean
that the better land would first be
chosen by the settlers themselves, and
would mean freedom from undue per-
suasion by anyone having personal
interest in the matter, and would
avoid any scramble upon the part OF
any large land holders to have their
lands included. Forty or more large
land owners have endorsed the direct
aid-to-settlers, one is opposing.
10. Direct aid to settlers, as against
the project plan, would appeal to the
public and to congress and especially
to the scores of thousands of present
settlers now upon the land and strug
Cling for a better grip on success, who
would be offended (and properly 500
if shut out of all benefit through the
adoption of project plan.
1t is believed that there will be lit
tie difference of opinion in the choice Of
plans and that every organization In
in