The Winslow mail., 1923-05-18
STATE OF arizona Should TAKE
OVER THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE
CANYON Of THE COLORADO RIVER
(By A. G.. McGregor.)

State of Arizona, with the same de-
gree of efficiency in management, can
| market power at about one half the
cost required by a private corpora
ton.
Objection to Federal Development.
The Federal Government would
have a similar advantage over a pri-
vate corporation in it's charges for
invested capital. There are several
disadvantages 1 believe, however, in
waiting for the Federal Government
to undertake the development. The
fact that it will be necessary to wait
nobody knows how long, is an i'm
portant objection. Another objec-
tion Where will Arizona get off if
the Federal Government takes over
our resources?
This talk about the River being
international" interstate, "navi-
gable, ETC., by the Washington and
California politicians as reason for
federal management political mana
| cement if you Willis pure camou-
! hage. Anyone that knows anything
| about the situation know the River
| is not navigable now, and the dams
| to be constructed will make it less
navigable, if that is possible. They
also know that the Governments on
| ly interest from an intertate and
F.! international standpoint lies in the
regulation of the flow of the River
to suit possible interstate and inter-
national irrigation needs.
' While with a suitable flood con-
troll reservoir, there is not likely to
! be any shortage of water below such
reservoir for irrigation by direct
| diversion for international and in
| terstate requirements for generations
| if ever, those familiar with the si-
tuation know if there should be a
| shortage, any state, municipality or
| private corporation having power
privileges in the Canyon will gladly
! comply with the requirements of the
federal Government as to the regu-
lation of the flow of the River.
The development of the Canyon
/ should be undertaken on a strictly
business basis. The lowest possible
cost of delivering power to the max
! imum number of users should be
| the main consideration in every step
that is taken. This would be impos-
TsiDle for the Federal Government on
account of the play of insterstate
politics. Already the subtle influen-
ce of Senator Pitman of Nevada has
attracted probably ten times more
attention to a dam site for storage
which is at the foot of he Canyon,
the wrong end Of the Canyon, than
has been attracted by all the other
sites in the Canyon put together.
/ Senator Pitman's Boulder Canyon
site happens to be in that short pOr
tion of the Canyon which makes the
boundary between Arizona and Ne
vada l am not criticising Senator
Pitman, mind you. Naturally Nevada
is very much interested.
Political Management Wrong
Under federal development, Sena-
tor Pitman will have vastly more in
| fluence in the determination of the
/ site for the first development than
all the present and prospective pow
er users in Arizona. Under federal
development a Rhode Island senator
will have more influence in the Sc
! lection of a construction foreman
than the biggest power users in Cal
ifornia
This great super-power resource
of ours has the possibility of becom-
| ing football with magic eXtraOr-
dinary for the politicians Of Wash
| ingtOn. Why not remove this dan
ger forever?
Sound Management for Super-POWer
MOnOpOlieS
We hear a great deal about the
| desirability Of creation certain sup
empower districts in the East, and
the millions of tons of coal that can
be saved annually through such ope-
ration. These developments are
coming, and we must have sound
management for them. The results
possible from the operation Of these
super-power projects will never be
attained through management by
: salaried commissions politically ap-
| pointed. A cooperative organization
of the power sellers cannot provide
the incentive for perfection in the
operation of Super-pOwer mono
/ poly either.
1 venture the prediction that the
only management that will efficient
and satisfactory to all concerned
will be management by cooperative
organization Of the power users,-I
those who pay the bills. Who will be
more vitality interested in the elimi-
nation of waste and in improve eco
I nomics than those who pay the bills?
Responsibility in management will
be in proportion to the amount Of
power used. The larger consumer
who are more vitality interested and
who are likely to have superior abb
lity in the direction of such an enter
prise, will have the greater power
in the selection of directors
Why not management Of super
power project or a state owned pow
| er monopoly by those who pay the
| bills?
Who will be more vitally interest
ed in good management and efficien-
cy in every department than they?
Who that is really interested in
efficient direction and the cheap
power resulting will question their
right or ability to manage
Continued on page seven)