WD 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 SB 
 
 LO 
 
 C\J 
 CO 
 
 o 
 
WYOMING 
 
 AS AN - 
 
 ADDRESS ON THE- 
 
 RECLAMATION OF THE ARID LANDS 
 
 BKFOltE THE 
 
 CHEYENNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. JAN. 16, 1894, 
 
 By ELWOOD MEAD, State Engineer. 
 
 1MT.LIS1IKD P.Y THE CHEYENNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AN ORGAN- 
 
 I/.ATH >\ TO PROMOTE THE INTERESTS OF THE 
 
 STATE OF WYOMING. 
 
 CHKVKXNK Wvo. 
 
 1S94. 
 
WYOMING 
 
 A8 AN 
 
 -ADDRESS ON THE- 
 
 RECLAMATION OF THE ARID LANDS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 CHEYENNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, JAN. 16, 1894, 
 
 By ELWOOD MEAD, State Engineer. 
 n 
 
 1MTH1.1SHKD BY THE CHEYENNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, AN ORGAN- 
 IZATION TO PROMOTE THE INTERESTS OF THE 
 STATE OF WYOMING. 
 
 CHEYENNK WYO. 
 
 JOH 1'JiIN'l'. 
 
 181)4. 
 

"WYOMIM AGRICULTURAL STATE" 
 
 -ADDRESS ON THE- 
 
 RECLAMATION TH F E ARID LANDS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 CHEYENNE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, JAN. 16, 1894, 
 
 By ELWOOD MEAD, State Engineer. 
 
 Wyoming as an Agricultural State is an anomaly; an anomaly difficult 
 of comprehension by students of irrigation from the outside world and one 
 which the friends of irrigation within the State find hard to explain. In 
 this I am speaking more particularly of the agriculture of the cultivated 
 field and exclude that form of agriculture which is more intimately asso- 
 ciated with what is known as the range industries. I do this because it is 
 my purpose tonight to talk of what we need rather than of what we have. 
 
 Naturally, it is a State of great opportunities. We are in the latitude 
 belt of the great agricultural states of this country. As an arid State we 
 have good.aeighbors. ' Excluding California, Colorado, Utah and Montana 
 rank first, second and third among the arid states in the value of their farm 
 produets. The State is favored^in the volume and availability of its water 
 supply. Colorado, Wyoming and Montana provide eighty-five per cent of 
 the available water supply of the entire arid region, and of these three, Wyo- 
 ming stsnds first or second. In the mileage of ditches the State takes high 
 rank. In the excellence of its water laws and the ^administrative system 
 which they provide, it is the accepted model of the ^hole arid region. 
 From the census report of 1890 down to the last irrigation congress there 
 has been only commendation for our water laws. 
 
 Withjertile soil and abundant water supply, satisfactory water laws, 
 the example and encouragement given by the success of irrigation in neigh- 
 
 472516 
 
boring Stat?s, i* would seem as though we had an adequate foundation for 
 rapid growth. .Hut for various causes we have never got beyond the- 
 formation. The evidences of growth are largely absent. 
 
 AREA OF CULTIVATED LAND. 
 
 One can travel, or could last summer, over every mile of operated rail- 
 way in the state, a distance of over one thousand miles, without seeug a 
 field of wheat. The census report of 1890 says Uhat this county, with its 
 million dollar investment in irrigation works, managed t/> grow thirty-nine 
 acres of wheat. Albany county grew six acres and Carbon county fifty-six 
 acres. The three most populous counties combined grew one hundred and 
 one acres. In all this great State with its sixty-three million acres of 
 laud only 19,000 acres were cultivated, about one per cent of the land 
 under ditches. In the light of facts like these it is not surprising that 
 our agricultural standing is Jow; that our modest exhibit at Chicago sub- 
 jected us to the charge of having had to go out of the State to procure it. 
 One could not remain m that exhibit a day without hearing expressions of 
 surprise and amazed conjecture as to whereabouts in the State it was 
 produced. 
 
 I speak of this becsuse of the contrast to the reception accorded the 
 exhibits of adjoining States. While Colorado's magnificent display of farm 
 products was a constant subject and commendation it occasioned no 
 surprise because it was m accrrd with popular anticipation, and the same- 
 was true of the superb collection of cereals from Montana, but when the 
 report went around that Wyoming wheat had scored the highest percentage 
 of any in the building there was a general agreement that the tate was 
 traveling outside its class. The same result occurred a few years ago when 
 Wyoming won the first prize in a national potato contest. The winner of 
 the second prize demanded an investigation and wrote to the journal con- 
 ducting the (M)utcst that the result showed fraud on its face because any one 
 who knew anything of Wyoming knew it had no farmers and no farms. 
 
 I could consume all the time that 1 sball tax your patience with similar 
 illustrations, showing that our actual agricultural production is small and 
 our reputation poor. 
 
 I think, however, that enough hrs been said on this unpleasant feature 
 of irrigation development in this State. It has only been referred to as a 
 prelude to a discussion of the causes for this condition of affairs. Why is 
 it that with equal natural advantage?, with as ready access to home seekers, 
 this State has fallen so far behind its neighbors in population and agricul- 
 tural development? Why is it that the census of 1890 shows that Colorado 
 cultivated under irrigation, two hundred and sixty-tive thousand acres [of 
 laud, Utah one hundred and fifteen thousand acres, Montana seventy-five 
 thousand acres, while Wyoming dragged along at the tail of the procession, 
 with only nineteen thousand acres. This result has not been due to 
 superiori y in natural conditions. It has been due in part to lack of orgau*- 
 ization and Jack of interest in securing emigrants, but in a greater part to 
 unfavorable legislative conditions, which have stood as a bar to success 
 wherever organization and effort have been put forth. 
 
 Heforo entering upon an explanation of these factors I wish to state 
 that the reclamation and seitlemeut of an arid State requires agencies and 
 aids not required in the settlement of states Ime Kansas and Nebraska. 
 
3 
 
 There, all that was neces. ary was to find an unoccupied quarter section. 
 The emigrant was immediately independent and self-supporting. The cul- 
 tivation oi his farm required no change from methods with which he was 
 familiar. 
 
 In the arid region the locations where agriculture can be practiced at 
 all are restricted, and the places where ditches can be built at an outlay 
 within the means of individual settlers extremely limited. The methods of 
 agriculture which must be pursued in an and State are largely different 
 from those which prevail in the humid region. The emigrant has to serve 
 an apprenticeship m a new art, and knowing this, he is not disposed to 
 venture upon it. unless it is under conditions which offer him some excep- 
 tional encouragement and support. The rapid and successful development 
 of arid States hr.s required two things: First, the location and construction 
 of irrigating works, in order that settlers may at once begin to earn a liveli- 
 hood, and, second, some organized agency to call the attention of intending 
 immigrants to the advantages offered and to assure the needed assistance 
 and instruction in mastering the unfamiliar art of irrigation. Without 
 going into all the details of the influences which have placed adjacent 
 States so far aheful of us in this work, I will give the leading forces in two. 
 
 So far as Utah was concerned, the rapid extension of irrigation, an j the 
 prosperity of the farmers of that territory has been largely due to the inter- 
 est and aid of the Mormon churcb. It provided the money to build canals; 
 the emissaries to secure colonists to occupy the laud which they reclaimed 
 and exercised an iron-clad control over emigrants, in restricting them to- 
 email holdings; to the acreage for which they could provide water and 
 which they could thoroughly cultivate, twenty acres being the accepted 
 unit. The result of this is that all the water carried in the ditches thus 
 built is used and all the land under them cultivated. 
 
 SETTLEMENT OF COLORADO. 
 
 In Colorado the first impetus to settlement was partly due to a favoring- 
 natural condition, but largely to a fortunate legislative accident. The fav- 
 oring natural condition was the cheapness with which ditches could be 
 built from the streams leaving the mountains north of Denver; the legisla- 
 tive accident was the including of these lauds within the limits of the 
 Union Pacific land grant. The Greeley colony was located on these lands 
 because of the opportunity to purchase outright the railroad lands at a 
 nominal price. Ttiis was the beginning of a series* of colonization enter- 
 prises. The railroad Inud was purchased, ditches built to reclaim it and 
 both land and ditches disposed of to colonies organized in the East by the 
 promoters ef these enterprises. Foreign capital became interested in the 
 the work, a corporation popubirlv known as the English company invested 
 millions of dollars ir the purchase of lauds, the construction of ditches and 
 in efforts at colonization in this region. To show that the opportunity to 
 secure control of the railroad lauds was the moving impetus in this work it 
 may be stated that, while this section of the State was gridironed with 
 ditches, other sections of the State with equal natural advantages and 
 requiring no greater outlay in their reclamation stood still. It was not 
 until the State had control of the donation of public laud, granted to the 
 State by Congress without any condition as to the terms of its dis- 
 posal, that the construction of ditches became universal throughout the 
 
State. Under the operation of the State law governing the disposal of 
 State laads irrigation construction made wonderful progress. This law 
 provided that one-half of the State land located beneath ditches already 
 built, or propsed ditches, could be disposed of to the ditch company at a 
 nominal price and the remaining half leased to the company for a period of 
 five years at a nominal price. There was no difficulty in securing capital 
 under these conditions. Possessing one-half the lands, ditch companies in 
 constructing canals, were very largely improving their own property; con- 
 trolling the other half they were able to colonize it with actual cultivators of 
 the soil and users of water. So favorably were these conditions regarded 
 that the agents of capital overran the State looking for ditch locations and 
 petitioning for the location of State lands. Cue corporation invested 
 $4,000,000 in irrigation works in four years. Rapid as was ditch construc- 
 tion the progress of colonization was almost as gieat; 10,000 people settling 
 upon the farming lands of San Luis valley in one year. la my judgment 
 no influence has t outributee so greatly to Colorado's growth and prosperity 
 as the method of disposing of its State lauds. Not even the discovery of 
 8ilver at Letulviile did &o much to increase its population. 
 
 PROGRESS OF RECLAMATION IX WYOMING. 
 
 During all this per'od, Wyoming was the headquarters of the range 
 industries. Oar irrigation system, like nearly all the industries of this State, 
 had its origin in the success of the cattle business. Three-fourths of all 
 our hrigiitiou works we're built by cattlemen or from the proceeds of the 
 range cattle business. The ditches were not built to furnish homes for 
 farmers but MS an adjunct to this business or a convenient means ot acquir- 
 ing title to land. Persons iutere. ted in the range industries were not look- 
 ing for farmers. Their interest lay in exactly the opposite direction, in 
 keeping the country as the Indian left it. An influx of farmers meant the 
 closing of water fiouts, the withdrawal of desirable lauds, the sacrifices of 
 privileges tkey eujoved. So Jong as he held the hot end of the poker the 
 stockman was uoi locking for a fir . In this he w/is only exercising busi- 
 ness prudence; he was the pioneer in the occupancy of the country, his 
 money and ih'it of his friends was invested in Ihe pioneer industry. It was 
 expecting more than human nature will warrant to expect that he should 
 jeopardize his own for the interest of others. I have always thought the 
 criticism which we sometimes har of the stockmen of this State is unjust 
 and unfair. If criticism should be visited upon any one for the lack of 
 interest in this matter, it belongs to the parties who would have been ben- 
 en'tted by our agricultural development, the dwellers in cities and towns, 
 the persons interested in industrial enterprises, all those whose prosperity 
 is largely dependent upon the increased comfort and diminished cost which 
 comes through a home food supply. And in speaking of this matter it is 
 not with any purpose of criticising any interest but simply to explain the 
 reason of our present agricultural condition. 
 
 With w> one providing for his coming and with all classes and condi- 
 tions indifferent as to whether he came or staid away it is not surprising 
 that the number of farmers is few. With the majority of the ditches owned 
 by men who are not farmers and who regard both ditches and irrigated land 
 as a side issue to some other business it is not surprising that a large per- 
 centage of the land under ditches is unproductive. Growing out of this 
 
development we have, however, to face these facts: the locutions where 
 ditches can be built cheaply in this State have practically all been utilized; 
 a large part of the land under th*se ditches is no\v unused; a considerable 
 portion of this unused land is valuable as farming land, but because of a 
 prejudice against farmers, because of a disbelief in the success of farming in 
 this State, the owners of this land are reluctant to dispose of it to actual 
 cultivators. This is unfortunate in two particulars. The land as now 
 held is unprofitable to its owners. Its ownership by individuals has with- 
 drawn it from settlement and occupancy by those who might use it to a 
 better advantage. I am in hopes, however, that we are to soon see a marked 
 improvement in this direction and I look for much good to result from the 
 occupancy of the land at Wheatland by small farmers. 
 
 AGRICULTURAL POSSIBILITIES OF THE STATE. 
 
 But when all the farming laud now under ditches has been brought 
 under cultivation we will only have fairly begun our agricultural develop- 
 ment. More water runs to waste in the North Platte river eack year than 
 is carried in all the ditches in the State. More water runs to waste in the 
 Green river than is used in irrigation. More water runs to waste in the 
 Big Horn than in the Platte and Greeu combined. The lands which these 
 streams would water are among the best in the State; the conditions of 
 farm life superior to that now prevailing, except in a few favored localities. 
 The ditches to be built must be large, the tracts of land to be reclaimed 
 extensive. Business and social institutions which require the cooperation 
 of a large number of people could be established; the most objectionable 
 feature of ranch life, its isolation, overcome. 
 
 To make these lands available, the canals to water them must first be 
 built. Settlers can not occupy the lands until th y can be irrigated. They 
 can not buiid the ditches because the expentiture of both time and money 
 which this involves is beyond their tneans. Surveys and estimates for 
 canals from the North Platte fixes the cost of one at $110,000, another at 
 $250,000, another at $2,000,000. The canal to water the platean lauds on 
 Green river will cost nearly two millions. It will require an outlay of a 
 million dollars to water the lands north of the gtinkingwater and half as 
 much to reclaim the lands along tb9 Big Hora. "We have reached a point 
 where there is little irrigable public laud for settlers outside the valleys of 
 these streams. We can not invite immigration here until in some way the 
 money required to build caunls is provided. 
 
 Since our admission to statehood a continuous effort has been made to 
 enlist capital in tMs work. The obstacle which has, in every case, proved 
 insurmountable is the unsatisfactory nature of our land laws. The objec- 
 tionable features of these laws can be explained by giving the experience 
 of one of the companies which endeavored to secure aid in the East. 
 
 Between Douglas and Fort Fetterman is a tract of 13,000 acres of 
 superior land. Some spirited public citizens of Douglas thinking to put 
 an end to their annual contribution of $60,000 to Nebraska, subscribed the 
 money necessary to secure an estimate of the cost of a canal to water this 
 laud. The estimate was $110,000, or about $10 an acre. So far as natural 
 conditions go, with the exception of expense, no more favorable location 
 for a ditch project could be found. The land is fertile, the water supply 
 
6 
 
 abundant, the elevation satisfactory and there is a local market with good 
 prices for all that could be produced. 
 
 The land is worth nothing without water, bnt if the experience of other 
 localities can be taken as a guide, the possession of a water supply will 
 make it worth $15 or $20 an acre. Parties approached were willing to 
 provide the needed amount provided the land could be made security, but 
 when it was explained that it was public land, that there were no settlers 
 and could h<* none until the ditch was assured, the question was raised as 
 to what inducement there was to an investor to make an improvement of 
 $10 an acre on government land when he had no means of securing the 
 land, no means of determining whether the land would be occupied by a 
 person willing to pay for that improvement, or, if willing, whether he would 
 be able to pay for it. 
 
 The party whose aid was solicited then asked if the promoters of the 
 enterprise would be willing to furnish an independent and adequate gaur- 
 anty that the settlers who filed on the land would either become part 
 owners in the canal or purchasers of water for their land at a price to repay 
 the money expended on the canal. This could not be done. Leaving out 
 of consideration the speculative filings, made simply to secure the advance 
 in values due to the construction of the canal and the improvement of 
 adjacent lands, it WHS certain that only a small number of the settlers could 
 pay $10 an acre for the water supply for 160 acres, but that all would be 
 disposed to file on 160 acres, because there would be no material increase 
 in cost over filing on a lesser area. The result was too apparent, there 
 would have been fir^t speculative filings on a portion of the land by men 
 who were not farmers, but who would avail themselves of the opportunity 
 to secure a share ju the increase of value. Second, filing on 160 acres by 
 farmers able to provide water for and to cultivate one-fourth or one-half 
 that area. Under favorable conditions, it was certain that fully half the 
 land must remain idle and unproductive for an indefinite period, and the 
 chances for the investment proving safe or lucrative not one in a million. 
 
 The objections raised in this case are the objections which have been 
 raised in every case. We have here natural conditions which require that 
 canals shall be built in advance of settlement. We have laud laws which 
 permit of settlement of the lauds to be benefitted under terms which amount 
 to virtual confiscation of the sums spent in their improvement. So long as 
 these laws remain in force it is not reasonable to expect that we will secure 
 any material assistance from the outside world. 
 
 There was a time when money could be secured to construct ditches to 
 water public land jnst as there was a time when any prospect hole in the 
 mountains could be sold as a mine, but the results following both invest- 
 ments have been of the same character. Fully ninety per cent of all the 
 ditches built to water public laud have proven financial disasters to their 
 owners and this fact is now generally understood. 
 
 The obstacles which the present land laws present aie aggravated in 
 our case by the fact that we are not able in any way to circumvent them. 
 We have not, as have other States, any adventitious aids. We have not, as 
 has Colorado, a State land law which permits of this donation being used 
 as an aid to development. The conditions attached to the donation to this 
 State, which fixes the minimum selling price of these lands at $10 an acre, 
 
prevents their being used for any such purpose and renders our last condi- 
 tion worse than the first. We have not, or has Montana, a railroad grant 
 extending along our most desirable streams. We have not, as has New 
 Mexico, Arizona and California, Spanish laud grants whose possession by 
 private individuals opens a field for private enterprises. We have not, as 
 has Nebraska, been able to invite settlers by a rain belt delusion and thus 
 secure the private ownership of the lands to be reclaimed. Because Wyo- 
 ming is unable to evade the provisions of the public land laws her people 
 can not secure any aid from the coffers of capital. 
 
 .While we furnish an engineer to Anzna to expend a million dollars of 
 eastern capital in the reclamation of a Spanish land grant, while we provide 
 the Superintendent of this water division to old Mexico to expend a large 
 sum in the improvement of another laud grant, we are compelled to see our 
 own resources undeveloped, our people look elsewhere for employment, our 
 business enterprises come to naught and all because of laud laws which 
 have no reason or justification for their existence. 
 
 The homestead law as applied to the region for -which it was framed 
 was a beneficent institution. As applied to a region entirely different it is 
 an obstruction to progress, the most effective barrier to securing kornes for 
 the very class it was designed to protect. The principle of the homestead 
 law must be preserved, but it must be a homestead law suited to the arid 
 region. The present homestead law, instead of being a means of keeping 
 homes for settlers, is a means of keeping homes from settlers. The desert 
 law offers no aid whutevei in the diversion of our great rivers. The acreage 
 is too small for the purposes of the dit sh builder; it is too great for the pur- 
 poses of the settler. There is not o le immigrant ia ten thousand who 
 comes to this country to find a home.wao has the means to reclaim and cul- 
 tivate 320 acres of land under irrigation. 
 
 Because the homestead law was a beneficent institution elsewhere, there 
 is a popular distrust and a popular prejudice against any complaint of its 
 operation here, but this distrust is due to lack of investigation of the ques- 
 tion. It is simply because the matter has not been studied that the domain 
 of its operation has been extended. What I wish, and what we must have, 
 is a law which will furnish adequate security for the money spent in the 
 reclamation of these lands, and to do this we must have a law which will 
 prevent speculative or excessive filings, which will limit the filings on land 
 under ditches to the area, which a settler cau cultivate and which he can 
 provide water for. 
 
 I can see no injustice, I can see no hardship in making the laud a basis 
 of credit for the money which reclaims it. I can see no hardship to the 
 settler who occupies that land in requiring as an absolute condition that he 
 shall pay for the expenses thus incurred. I can see no wrong or injustice 
 in permitting the party expending monoy to reclaim this land becoming the 
 owner of it if, after a reasonable time, settlers can not be found to occupy 
 it. A homestead law which would provide such conditions would furnish 
 all the incentive required, all the security required for the reclamation of 
 our arable lands. But until we have some such law, until public sentiment, 
 becomes awakened to this questson, until favorable action can be secured 
 from Congress the greatest resource of this State will run to waste, our 
 lands will lie idle, the cost of living will be excessive, and worst of all our 
 
8 
 i 
 
 ultimate use and control of these streams will be jeopardised by the estab- 
 lishment of prior claims below us. The people of this State have expressed 
 a righteous indignation at the action of Colorado in diverting the Laramie 
 river to the injury of prior appropriate rs in this State, but there is little- 
 appreciation of the fact that so far as the Platte river is concerned the indi- 
 cations are now that the shoe will soon be on the other foot. 
 
 In an article entitled "Wyoming, the Second Pennsylvania;" in 
 Harper's Magazine last year, the writer states the people of Wyoming 
 regard this State as a second Pennsylvania and are justified in their belief 
 that the stores of iron and coal which the State possesses have been the 
 foundation of great and prosperous commonwealths, bat gives as his own 
 conclusion, after a survey of the whole State; that the "State has a greater 
 and surer asset in Wyoming soil." It is because I believe that this is true,, 
 because I wish to see the lands of this State utilized as homes for the 
 present generation, because, being a citizen of the State, I wish to see it 
 grow and prosper, that I have called your attention to this matter and hope 
 that your aid and iEflueuce may be directed to securing this needed reform. 
 
 THE REMEDY. 
 
 It is one thing to locate the disease, but a far different matter to pre- 
 scribe the remedy. Especially is this true of the reclamation of the 
 arid lands. Differences in climatic conditions, differences in laws in 
 the several arid states, has given rise to diverse views as to the proper 
 course to be pursued. Nor are the people of any single state agreed. 
 The problem is new and complex. Comparatively few have had the time 
 or opportunity to give the necessary study and investigation to the sub- 
 ject. Because of this, there is a reluctance about endorsing any measure 
 of relief. 
 
 In submitting my personal views it is not with any desire of insisting- 
 upon their being- accepted. Should the people of this state favor some 
 different plan which will reach the desired end, I am ready to accept and 
 advocate it. 
 
 OUTLINE OF NEEDED REFORMS. 
 
 What we want first is a change in the land laws which will either 
 require tbe present holder of the irrigable public land to reclaim it or 
 transfer it to some one who will. Thus far the United States has been 
 a failure as an arid land owner A landlord who pays no taxes and 
 makes no improvements. 
 
 We want land laws which recognize the fact that all arid land is 
 not irrigable and which will provide for the management and disposal of 
 the grazing land in connection with the irrigable. 
 
 We want land laws which provide for the preservation of the store 
 house of our water supply, the mountain forests. 
 
 We need canals from our rivers but we also need them built under 
 conditions which will protect the rights and insure the prosperity of 
 those who are to use them. There is only one way to do this, the land 
 and water must go together; the owners of the land must also own the- 
 ditch which makes the land productive. 
 
 We want no canal companies carrying water for hire.. 
 
We want no such vassalage as divided control of land and water 
 creates. 
 
 PROTECTION OF APPROPRIATORS. 
 
 We need a system which will enable us to more effectively protect 
 the rights of appropriators on small streams; which will prevent the over 
 appropriation and the wrongful diversion and use of their waters. This 
 cannot be done now because the authorities in charge of the public land 
 give no attention whatever to the require mentsof our irrigation system. 
 It accomplishes nothing for the State to refuse "Permits" to appropriate 
 water so long as the United States grants filings along streams which 
 permit of the unrestricted construction of ditches to divert the waters of 
 those streams. Crow Creek is a fair illustration of the results of this 
 system. Eighty ditches have been built to divert its water supply when 
 the stream will not fill one-fourth of that number. Twenty-eight of 
 these ditches have never complied with the provisions of the irrigation 
 law, yet they each year rob those entitled to the use of the water and 
 subject the taxpayers of the county to a heavy expense in the attempt to- 
 regulate them. 
 
 LOCATION OP IRRIGATION WORKS. 
 
 We need a system which will secure the construction of irrigation* 
 works according to some prearranged plan and which will assist in secur- 
 ing the co-operation of the parties constructing them. So long as there 
 is a divided control of land and water all attempts at securing co-opera- 
 tion on the parD of immigrants will be futile. We have already had suffi- 
 cient experience to show that a haphazard and unrestricted diversion of 
 water is not only wasteful and expensive, but in addition it makes the 
 adequate protection of priorities impossible. Yet we are unable to profit 
 by this lesson. The last diversions are of the same character as the first, 
 I have already referred to Crow Creek, one of the first streams utilized. 
 One of the last is the Grey Bull river, the valley of which has beenr 
 largely reclaimed in the past two vears. Under a prearranged plan halt 
 a dozen ditches would have reclaimed the entire area. Instead of these, 
 permits have bee-n issued for fifty individual ditches. Controversies 
 have already arisen between ditch owners. Petitions have already been 
 received for the abandonment of some of these ditches and the transfer 
 of the appropriations to others. The construction of useless ditches 
 involves an enormous waste of water, imposes unnecessary hardship and 
 expense upon the settler, and is laying the foundation for future litigation 
 which is unpleasant to contemplate. The fault for this is not with the 
 people who are endeavoring, under most adverse cond.tions, to reclaim 
 that section. It is with those in authority, in failing to provide an intel- 
 ligent system for such reclamation. If the plans for the ditches from 
 that stream had been prepared beforehand, the settlers occupying those 
 lands would have only too gladly co-operated in their construction, and 
 the result would have been a model irrigation system, which would have 
 cost the settlers less, would have removed all danger of future litigation r 
 lessened the expense of taxpayers for supervision and would have 
 resulted in no possible injury to any individual or interest. 
 
 LAND AND WATER UNDER ONE CONTROL. 
 
 To remedy these defects one condition is absolutely essential, the 
 
10 
 
 land and water must be under one control, and that control must be 
 -exercised in the location of ditches as well as in the division of water 
 between ditches. The present haphazard method of constructing 1 irri- 
 gating works is the exact counterpart of the primitive methods of dispos- 
 ing of land in the early history of this country when each settler went 
 into the woods and ""blazed" out his domain in any direction and to any 
 extent which inclination or interest might dictate. The long continued 
 and disastrous litigation which this entailed upon the southern States is 
 certain to have its counterpart in water controversies if we do not take 
 adequate measures to secure a reform in present method-. 
 
 PROPOSED METHODS OF RECLAIMING ARID LANDS. 
 
 Four plans for securing- the reclamation of the arid lands are now 
 prominently before the country. Two of these plans provide for the 
 exercise of jurisdiction and control over the work by the authorities of 
 the National government. Two provide for the exercise of such control 
 by the authorities of the several State governments. The plans proposed 
 ior the prosecution of this work by the National government are: First, 
 the building of ditches by direct appropriations from the treasury of the 
 United States, the work to be done according to plans provided by 
 government officers and under the supervision of such officers. The 
 second of these plans provides for the work being clone by private parties 
 who are given a lien upon the* land to be reclaimed as security for the 
 return of the money invested in their construction; but the supervision 
 of the work, the control of the land and the control of the water supplies 
 to be under the jurisdiction of the National government. 
 
 The plans which provide for the prosecution of this work under State 
 control are: Fir>t, the preparation of plans and the construction of 
 -ditches by the State, the money to be provided by direct appropriations 
 from the treasury or by the sale oT bonds. Second, the construction of 
 ditches and canal- by private enterprise under plans prepared by, or 
 accepted by the State authorities, the parties constructing the canals to 
 be secured by a lien on the land to be reclaimed. 
 
 All of these plans agree in two particulars. First, that the object 
 of this reclamation is to- provide homes for settlers, that the land must 
 be disposed of in small trac's to settlers who are to be cultivators of* the 
 soil and users of water. Second, that the expense of such reclamation 
 is to be borne by the parties who receive the benefit, that is, the settlers 
 who occupy the land reclaimed. If either the State or national govern- 
 ment provides the money from its treasury, or from the sale of bonds, it 
 does so with the expectation and understanding that the money is to be 
 returned from the sale of the land and the improvements placed thereon 
 by the expenditure of this money. If private parties furnish the money 
 for the construction of these works they expect to either receive their 
 compensation from the sale of the lands and improvements, by the State 
 or national government to settlers, or through the sale themselves of the 
 land and ditches, to settlers. 
 
 Another plan for the carrying out of this work by congress has been 
 sometimes discussed and advocated by the press of this region. It is that 
 congress should make absolute appropriations or donations for the con- 
 struction of ditches exactly as it makes appropriations for the improve- 
 
11 
 
 "merit of rivers anil harbors. I have not included this as among the plans 
 before the country because such plan has never been advocated in 
 congress; because I am told by some of the best lawyers in this State that 
 congress would have no constitutional right to make such appropriations, 
 and because it would meet with the unanimous opposition of other sec- 
 tions of the country. 
 
 STATE SUPERVISION FAVORED. 
 
 WhPther this matter be considered from the standpoint of local 
 interest or from the standpoint of the best interests of the whole arid 
 region, I am in favor of either of the two plans for prosecuting the work 
 under State control, rather than either of the two plans for prosecuting 
 the work under national control. As regards the two plan 5 * for prose- 
 cuting the work under national control; I am opposed to the first because 
 I wish to see some results accomplished in the lifetime of this generation. 
 I do not think there is any hope of doing this if we .are to depend upon 
 appropriations from the national treasury. I am opposed to it because 
 any one who has had any acquaintance with *he methods pursued in the 
 construction of national public works knows that they are far more 
 dilatory, far more expensive, than is the case in the prosecution of similar 
 work by either State or private authorities. 
 
 NATIONAL INTERFERENCE WITH EXISTING RIGHTS. 
 
 I am opposed to both of the plans for prosecuting this work under 
 national control because it involves the surrender of the control of our 
 streams to those authorities; because it revolutionizes the irrigation 
 system already established in this State. Whenever the United States 
 begins the building of ditches, an immediate conflict between the rights 
 of appropriations under the State law and appropriations under the 
 ditches built by the national government will ensue, the result of which 
 will be the jeopardizing of every appropriation made at the present time. 
 
 I do not look upon any movement which contemplates, or which 
 threatens this with the slightest degree of favor. The pioneers of irriga- 
 tion in this State have already expended over ten million dollars in the 
 construction of ditches and the reclaiming of lands. Through the 
 negligence of the United States to render them any aid or assistance, 
 they have done this work under the most adverse conditions; they have 
 done it in accordance with a system of water laws of Ibeir own creation, 
 a system of laws which they understand, which make their rights the 
 prior claims upon the waters of the streams, and which secures their 
 rights and claims against all possible encroachments from the diversion 
 of these streams by any agercies under control of the State hereafter. I 
 believe that any surrender of the guarantees which the State laws afford, 
 of the protection which these prior water rights now enjoys 1 , would be 
 nothing less than a crime, and I as fully believe that the invitation to 
 the United States authorities to take charge of this work, to bssume such 
 jurisdiction over our streams, would involve such a su r render. 
 
 SACRIFICE OF NATURAL ADVANTAGES. 
 
 I am opposed to making canal building a national work because it 
 involves the sacrifice of our natural advantages and the surrender of the 
 exclusive control of our water supply. Under such a system political 
 influence instead of industrial needs would govern the building of canals. 
 
12 
 
 Each arid State would strive to forestall its neighbor in securing govern- 
 ment aid. JMtch building would become a matter of lobbying and log 
 rolling instead of legitimate business enterprise, and in this contest Wyo- 
 ming would certainly suffer. 
 
 Take the case of the North Platte river; would canals from that 
 stream be first built in Nebraska or Wyoming? So far as political influ- 
 ences are concerned, the representation of Nebraska in congress is 
 greater than that of Wyoming. The land to be reclaimed in Nebraska 
 has passed into the hands of settlers and in part from settlers to loan 
 companies through mortgage foreclosures. All these parties would have 
 a direct interest in securing the first aid and in making their rights the 
 prior claim on the stream. Their combined influence would reach half 
 the representatives in congress and there is no question but that it would 
 be far more potent than the mute appeal of the arid, unoccupied acres of 
 Wyoming. 
 
 What is true of tb.e North Platte is true of every inter-state stream 
 in this State. It would be Wyoming against the tield. One State with 
 60.000 people against a half dozen State s with a hundred times our popu- 
 lation and an infinite superiority in wealth and influence. 
 
 The greatest possible diversion and use of inter-state streams in 
 Wyoming will be a benefit rather than an injury to the States below us. . 
 Not half the water can ever be used in this State and three-fourths of all 
 used will pass on to the States below, after it has rendered its service 
 here. It will reach the irrigators in adjoining States at the period of 
 least supply and will be an equal protection from the disasters of floods 
 or injury from drought. But all those who have talked with the residents 
 of those regions know that it is difficult to convince them of these facts 
 and that if we are to adopt a system which ixakes it possible to disregard 
 them they will very likely be disregarded. 
 
 PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE CONFINED TO ARID STATES. 
 
 I am opposed to the national government being placed in control of 
 this matter, because it is naturally a concern of the Stale; because tho 
 best results will come through a system which appeals to local pride and 
 enlists local enterprise; and because it is a matter in which all practical 
 knowledge, all practical experience, is confined to the arid States. To 
 transfer the management and control of this question to Wishinjjton, is 
 to transfer it two thousand miles from the States where the work is to be 
 performed; it is to place it under the control of a body of men, three- 
 fourths of whom are absolutely ignorant of its fundamental requirements. 
 
 In an able speech advocating the transfer of the lands to the States, 
 before the Salt Lake Irrigation congress, W. H. Mills of California, said: 
 "The great fault with the land system of the United States, is that you 
 are attempting- to administer a domain actually more vast than was ever 
 drawn together in one single, civil polity. * It is the very fact 
 
 that you cannot administer a land department in one place that would 
 make it judicious today for the government of the United States to estab- 
 lish land offices, with all the power possessed by the general land office 
 in the various States. * * * Ignorance and inexperience have run 
 that office continually, and you can organize a land department in every 
 State and territory west of the Missouri river that will take up the lands 
 
18 
 
 and attend to them with a higher degree of intelligence and a greater 
 expedition than you will ever accomplish by attempting to administer 
 them from Washington." 
 
 I believe that local experience will largely sustain that statement. 
 If we are to disregard the unhappy experience of individuals in their 
 dealings with the land office at Washington and consider only general 
 legislation there is abundant evidence that national legislation on land 
 matters has either shown a marvelous ignorance of the arid region or 
 disregard of the requirements of that region. The government trans- 
 ferred the fertile lands of Kansas and Iowa to the settler who occupied 
 them upon the most liberal terms, but the individual who wishes to 
 reclaim the desert wastes of Wyoming is subjected, under the operations 
 of the desert law, to the requirement of expending, within a limited 
 time, enough money to buy a farm in many sections of the fertile and 
 populous east. 
 
 The first attempt of the national law makers to deal with the irriga- 
 tion problem direct, was the legislation of 1888, which withdrew all the 
 irrigable lands of the arid region from settlement until such time as the 
 government could investigate this question, an investigation which those 
 in charge estimated would occupy fifty years. Its first law was one 
 which had to be absolutely disregarded, until public stntiment in the 
 arid States could force its repeal. We have the condition fixed by 
 congress which says that no acre of State land shall be sold for less than 
 ten dollars. Even the wildest flight of imagination cannot conceive how 
 the erudite statesman who framed that clause could have believed that 
 unimproved arid land was worth any such sum. What would have been 
 the result to this State if we had not been able to secure the repeal of the 
 law of 1888? It could have been nothicg except to stop our growth. 
 What is the effect of the $10 limitation? Simply to prevent State lands 
 being made an aid to growth; to make the selection of irritable land by 
 he State Land Commission equivalent to withdrawing it from occupancy 
 and development and to make the selection of grazing lands ridiculous. 
 
 VIEWS OF MAJ. POWELL. 
 
 The transfer of the control of the reclamation of our irrigable lands 
 to Washington would place it under the control of the Interior Depart- 
 ment. The representative of this department, at the Los Angeles Irri- 
 gation Congress in October, 1893, said: 
 
 "There is not enough water and never can be; a quantity of water 
 can never be conserved sufficient to irrigate more than one-third of the 
 land already owned by private individuals. 
 
 "Not one more acre of land should be granted to individuals for irri- 
 gation purposes. If you irrigate the lands yet 'retraining :n the hands of 
 the government you have got to sacrifice some of the lands yet remaining 
 in the hands of individuals." 
 
 According to this, it is the opinion of the Interior Department, or 
 the accredited representative of this department, that no more irrigable 
 public land in Wyoming should pass into the hands of the settler. The 
 result of this policy, if carried out, would be that the valley of the Platte 
 Tiver would remain an arid waste, while the waters of that stream were 
 'used to reclaim the lands in the hands of private individuals in Nebraska. 
 
14 
 
 It would mean that the valley of the Big Horn would remain a wilder- 
 ness while the waters conserved upon the mountains of Wyoming- and 
 gathered together in the valley of that stream would be used to reclaim' 
 the lands belonging to private individuals in western Dakota. 
 
 In the light of legislation of this character; in the light of opinions like 
 these held by the authorities at Washington; in the light of the hostility of 
 the agricultural east to the rapid development of the agricultural west, I 
 think we ought carefully to consider before we favor transferring the control 
 of our development to Washington and to the domination of such adverse 
 influences. 
 
 REASONS FOR FAVORING STATE CONTROL. 
 
 1 am in favor of the transfer of the control of these lauds ^ind the entire 
 solution of this problem to the several States. I am in favor of it because 
 each one of the arid States has already assumed and exercised its control 
 over the most complex and difficult part cf this question, the management 
 of the water supply. I am in favor of it because it involves no disturbance 
 of existing rights to such water supply but rather affords the State the 
 means and opportunity to extend needed aid in the improvement of the 
 water supply, and to render the protection of existing rights more efficient 
 than is possible at the present time. I am in favor of it because it enables 
 each Slate to modify a general plan, which may be prepared by congress, to 
 suit local conditions. This cannot be done under any national system.. 
 The requirements of Wyoming and California are too diverse to be harmon- 
 ized. The difference in climatic conditions should be recognized by a cor- 
 responding difference in laws. The owner of three hundred and twenty 
 acres of land in southern California is a nabob. The productive value of 
 twenty acres is greater than six hundred and forty acres in certain portions 
 of Wyoming. If we are to have a national irrigation system, California 
 will urge, and properly from their standpoint, that the limit to a homestead, 
 should be twenty acres, so will Arizona, and if they should succeed in 
 placing that limit upon the disposal of lands in this State, then California 
 and Arizona uonld get all the settlers and the condition of Wyoming 
 would be worse than it is at present. One arid land law will no more meet 
 the requirements of this region, so vast in extent, so diverse in conditions,, 
 than will one coat fit all men. 
 
 THE GRAZING LANDS. 
 
 The disposal and management of grazing binds is of no consequence 
 whatever in California; it is oue of the greatest problems with which this- 
 State has to deal. The grazing interert of this State has been the leading 
 interest and will always continue to be one of the leading interests, because 
 of the high elevation of a large part of ibis State, because a l.^rge part of 
 this State i.i and will be remote from markets. The water of a large 
 number of our streams can only be profitably utilized, the lands can only be 
 profitably reclaimed, when used in connection with the grazing lands 
 which adjoin them. The failure of the present laud law to recognize this- 
 fact is working great hardship to many of the small settlers on the streams 
 remote from markets. They can only make their irrigable lauds profitable 
 by using them in connection with the grazing lands adjoining. As it is 
 now, they have no means of controlling or protecting these grazing 'ands.. 
 
15 
 
 and when range herds of cattle or flocks of sheep invade them their sup- 
 port is destroyed. 
 
 The laud commission, designated to select State lauds in 'Wyoming, 
 has received applications from such settlers, which aggregate over a half 
 million acres, for the selection of grazing lauds adjoining their farms, and 
 there is no knowing what these aapplications would aggregate if the said 
 commission had not given uotice that no further requests of this kind would 
 be considered at the present time. The number of these requests and the 
 statements made by applicants can lead to but one conclusion: that the 
 need for relief in this matter is urgent; that the injury which is being 
 wrought from this omission is serious and widespread. Man}' of these 
 ranchmen state that their ability to support themselves Hud their families, 
 their ability to remain citizens of this State, rests entirely upon some relief 
 being afforde^; which relief must give them the opportunity to use and 
 control the grazing lands contiguous to their farms. Now, this question, 
 so full of serious import to Wyoming, is a matter of no consequence to 
 California, of no consequence whatever to Kansas, to Dakota, to Nebraska, 
 and the only way in which we can expect it to receive adequate and intelli- 
 gent treatment is by the transfer of its management to those who under- 
 stand it and have a vital interest its proper solution; and that authority is 
 the State. 
 
 I am in favor of the transfer of ihis matter to the State, because I be- 
 lieve in that way homes can be secured for the homeless at less cost than 
 if the work is placed under the control of the national government. I 
 believe that ditches built by the State, or by private parties under the 
 supervision of the State, will be better built, will be built at less cost than 
 if built under the control and supervision of the United States; and if th& 
 settler is to pay for this, the settler is the one to be beuefitted by the eco- 
 nomical procedure. 
 
 I believe that Wyoming, of all the arid States, is the last one to look 
 with favor ou a surrender of the control of this matter to ihe national gov- 
 ernment. We occupy the crest of this continent, we have in our mountains 
 the greatest store-house of water in the whole arid region. If the solution 
 of this question is left to us, if we are given the means to carry on this recla- 
 mation, then the extent of our development will only be limited by the 
 extent of our opportunities, Jf this matter 'is transferred to the United 
 States then our development will not depend upon our opportunities, but 
 upon the influence of the States below us. 
 
 The only objection \vhich I have ever heard urged to the transfer of 
 the entire control of this matter to the State has been the contention that 
 State legislatures are essentially dishonest; that State legislatures can 
 not be entrusted with the management of so great a trust. I have never 
 believed that that objection was a valid one because in the first place it 
 is not necessary, it is not desired that an absolute grant be made from 
 the United States to the Stale. All that is desired is that the grant be 
 made conditionally; that the State be made a trustee; that the general 
 conditions under which these lands are to be administered and reclaimed 
 be fixed by congress and that on the failure of any State to comply with 
 those conditions that congress bj authorized to again assume control. 
 
 I do not believe it, because to admit that the State authorities are 
 
16 
 
 incompetent to deal with this question is to admit that the whole theory 
 of separate State governments is a failure. If a State government can 
 not be trusted to deal with an essentially domestic affair, an essentially 
 State affair, then it seems to me that the sooner State government is 
 abandoned the better. If we are to entrust the management of our 
 industrial development to congress because of a fear and distrust of our 
 State government then statehood is a failure and State government ought 
 to be abolished. Personally, I believe that such fear and distrust is 
 without adequate foundation; that the theory of State governments to 
 administer local affairs is a correct theory; that State governments are 
 fitting and appropriate custodians for the control of all such matters; 
 and that one of the most injurious, one of the most dangerous tendencies 
 at the present time, is the disposition to transfer all power, all authority, 
 all responsibility, to the national government. 
 
THIS 
 
 DATS 
 
 AN INITIAL PINE OF 25 CENTS 
 
 a TO RETURN 
 
 BOOK ON THE DATE DUE THE PENALTY 
 
 O so CENTS 
 
 TTORZT 
 
 ' 
 
 SENTO|iiL 
 
 mrTS 
 
 U. C. BERKELEY 
 
 LD 21-100m-8,'34 
 
RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT 
 
 202 Main Library 
 
 LOAN PERIOD 1 
 HOME USE 
 
 4 
 
 ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS 
 
 Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date. 
 
 Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405. 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 SENT ON ILL 
 
 
 
 NOV 6 1995 
 
 
 
 U. C. BERKELEY 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 FORM NO. DD6 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY 
 BERKELEY, CA 94720