The Oakley herald. [volume] (Oakley, Idaho) 1908-1961, 1923-01-26
A. X. saxer. Professor OF Mathematics
Utah Agricultural College.

| Approximately S.fNtNn acre-feet
/ OF water are he,ng diverted from the
streams OF Utah for irrigation pur-
] poses every year.
Practically 5000 600 acre-feet OF
! this water is wasted every year. IL
we consider the actual water neeshs
OF the lands to which this water Is
being applied.
This reasoning is perfectly simple
when we consider that Utah has oniv
1,O0o00O acres of irrigated land to
which the above mentioned S.M0.00O
acre-fest OF water are being applied.
II IL we'll known fact. established
nv the Experiment Station OF the
Utah Agricultural College. that acre
feet of water are amply sufficient for
the actual neesls of the crops upon an
acre Of average land. provided that
the water is properly applied.
This figures out that 2.O00oV
acre-feet of irrigati water should be
sufficient for our 100000 acres OF
irrigated land leaving a balance OF
6.OOO.OO0 acre-feet goin- to waste.
If this could he utilized to its full
capacity, Il would furnish water foi
100000 acres OF land. or three time
as much as we are now irrigat'ng.
IAN Impossible Dream" would be
the reply Of the average irrigator to
the fores ing statement. but II d.
true nevertheless. II is also true that
IL the average canal company wer'
restricted to two scre-feet of water
for each acre OF land covered by Its
canal, the lands would suffer foi
want of water and the crops would
wither and perish.
The average irrigator Is not vast
ing wafer as far as he can help It,
lie simply takes the water that is his
and under existing conditions applies
II to the hest OF his ability. He gets
results and the fact that he user
several times more water than Is
really necessary is frequently no faul,
of his.
The fact remains. however. that
two acre-feet OF water per acre are
sufficient when properly applied. This
fact has been proven time and tim,
again by the Experiment Station of
the Utah Agricultural College.
The Big Question. however. Is
"Can this two feet OF water he botn
ECONOMICALLY and PROPERLY
applied?"
The answer to this question al
present is probably NO. To recon |
struct the average irrigation system
from the point of intake to the point
of application OF the water, and the
further preparation OF the land 81
that there shall he no waste In appli-
cation. would he so expensive that
the cash value OF the 6 feet OF water
saved would fall far short OF oover-
ing the expenses incurred.
| say that at present the answer
to the Big Question is probably no.
hut Utah must have more irrigated
irrigafe them with. We have reache,
the pra, teal limit of our water sup
ply and the water to irrigate these
new fields must he obtained In a
rreat measure by decreasing the
amount INV being used on our pres
ent irrigated area.
From 30 to 40 per cent OF the
water taken from the streams Of Utah
is lost by the canal companies he
fore 1t IS delivered to the land tol
which 1t is to he applied. Show the
average canal company how 1t can
H., Ia
water thus saved for enough to paw
4 r this Increased expense and it will
10 so without any outside or legal
pressure being brought to hear. As
ong rs the saving of certain amount
N water is losing financial pro-
position. no canal company is going
~ ''break Its neck" to do this say.
ng.
Show the average irrigator how he
nm prepare his lnnd and apply his
irrigation water so that 2 feet will
let him the same crop that 4 feet
lid before. and he will gladly do SO.
provided you show him at the same
ime where he is going to come mt
head on the proposition financially
Waste Of material IL not waste IN
he generally accepted order OF tn ms
1t Is possible to prevent It only
Il a financial sacrifice.
The tail'ngs and Stag piles at many
+ our large mines contain hun1reds
# thousands of dollars of mineral
hat has been wasted In the process
{ handling the ores. yet we are nov
adding up our hands in horror at this
waste. The reason is that
can he prevented or recovered only
[ financial loss. and Is therefore ,
present. not regarded as being
wasted. The Sshool OF Mines is ,
owever. daily struggling with the .
roblem OF how to economically trea- I
lese ores so that this waste shall {
2 minimum. a
Just so II Is with the bigger prob
I'M of economically handling our ir- b
gatb waters and reducing our o
raoapf ,,r,naroutlv aunrm0ue wuqfel q