The Delta independent., 1925-02-20
WHAT GARRET
THINKS OF US

The following article is taken fro
the January 18th issue of the "Satu
day Evening Post" written by Gar,
Garret under the caption of "Tt
Tale of Uncle Sans Voyage in a
Irrigation Ditch:
On the Uncompahgre project is
a strange illustration. The gov
ernment spent there nearly $S,.
100000. The cost assessed uUcn
the land was nearly $40 an acre.
The settlers are hopelessly be
hind in their payments because
first they were never anxious 10
pay, and latterly they have fallen
into serious general trouble
Their farms and crops are heavily
mortgaged. They owe more than
they can pay. Well, what has
happened? In the land boom
five years ago many of the origi-
nal settlers sold out to- newcom-
ers at $3.50 and $500 an acre and
flew away with all the profit OF
fifteen years of Federal irriga-
tion. The people now in diff
culties are those who paid $3.50
and $500 an acre for the land it.
self. They paid too much. But
having paid so much for the
land that there is no profit in
farming it, they appeal to the
government for relief. They de-
mand that the construction cost
assessed upon the land for irriga.
tion works be reduced from so
to $25 an acre.
To discuss in particular the
misfortunes of agriculture on
Federal reclamation projects Is
unnecessary. Irrigated agricul-
ture is subject to all the ills and
contradictions that beset agricul-
ture at large, plus one fundament-
al error peculiar to itself-name-
ly, that irrigation for general
farming is before its time. Eco
nomically the country does not
need it. For specialized types OF
intensive farming, and under GER
tain geographical conditions, 1t
is justified, and then it pays.
But there are no such distinctions
in practice. General farming is
conducted on irrigated desert
land where the cost OF irrigation
alone is more than the value Of
naturally arabic land elsewhere.
equally productive in the same
crops. For instance. more than
one-eighth of all the land in Fed
eral reclamation projects is in
wheat Growing wheat for export
on irrigated desert land is like
growing potatoes in a greenhouse.
More than one-third OF all the
land in Federal reclamation pro
jects is in hay. 1t would be all
right to grow hay on this land II
the hay were fed there-that is, II
it were converted on the farm in
to flesh and butterfat. Most Of
it is not. Hay is shipped in bales
from irrigated land in the arid
West into the Mississippi valley
even TO Florida; and they com
plain Of the freight rate.
The sum of the truth is this:
First, that Federal reclamation
after twenty-five years is proved
to be not a success, looking at II
from the point OF view either OF
the government or of agriculture:
second, that the profit has been
divided between the exploiters Of
land and the several states in
which new communities have
been created by Federal expendl-
tures, neither party to the profit
taking any part in the risk; and,
third, that the immediate prob
lem is how to save the projects
already in existence by getting
more people upon them, since the
productive power of the land is
not realized.
Would it occur to you that Fed
eral reclamation might be some
what in discredit?
Not so. The demand for It IS
more ambitious than ever before.
The pressure, once spontaneous
and naive, has become powerfully
organized The notion Of spend.
ing for reclamation only the pro
ceeds Of public land sales, mining
royalties, and 80 on, is far be
hind. In place Of it IS the idea
natural resources Of the country
that It Is the function Of the Fed.
eral Government to develop the
for the benefit OF states,