Under the original organization plans were made during the years 1902-07 for works whose completion has required all of the funds which would be available from the proceeds of the disposal of public lands for a decade or more — the plans being so drawn as to permit expansion to the full limit of the available water supply in each locality. The work was undertaken in such manner as to enable completed portions of each project to be utilized before all parts were finished. It was also considered wise to start work on a broad basis in a number of localities rather than con centrate it in a few places because by so doing a more nearly normal growth of each project was possible. This is in contrast to the attempts made by private investors to complete one large project and then operate it as a whole without having had the advantage of experi ence acquired through the slow growth of the component parts. Most of the works thus planned from 1902-07 have been brought to a degree of completion such that a large part of the land is being utilized. The appropria tions now made annually by Congress from the reclamation funds are utilized to finish these works.
Works Built.— The principal works are those for storage of flood or waste waters and for conducting the waters thus made available from the natural streams to the lands to be watered. Besides the large storage dams there have been built many diversion dams in the rivers, turning the water into large canals built in rock or earth. These divide and sub divide into smaller distributaries or laterals leading to each farm. To control the water, gates are provided in the canals and at each outlet; also flumes and occasionally pipe lines, bridges and culverts for road crossings, as well as many other structures. The following table gives a recapitulation of the more im portant of these: Economic Problems.— The object of the expenditure which has been made from the reclamation fund is to provide water for lands which without it would be incapable of produc ing valuable crops. The original intention was to take the water to lands belonging to the United States. It was found, however, that individuals taking advantage of various land laws had already obtained possession of the lands which might be irrigated to an extent such that it was impracticable to discriminate and hence lands which had formerly been in public ownership were included in the reclamation projects, the requirements being enforced that no one land owner should be permitted to obtain water from the government works for an area larger than that adequate for the support of a family and not to exceed 160 acres.
Although the government advanced the money and built the works, it is intended that the lands benefited shall ultimately return the cost in 10, or as later amended 20, annual instal ments without interest. It is also required that until this amount is paid the owner must live upon the land or in the vicinity, the inten tion being to prevent as far as possible absentee landlordism, and to give the preference to those men and their families who are actually seek ing a home, as distinguished from an opportunity for investment or speculation.
The 'liberal terms offered and the fact that the government was undertaking the work attracted all kinds of people, including both competent and incompetent. There is no provision by which selection can be made of persons who are qualified by strength or ex perience to carry on an irrigated farm. As a result a considerable number of adventurers or rLstless people seized upon the opportunity in the lopes of getting from the government something for nothing and of selling out later at a profit. It followed that in the settlement of these lands there has been some shifting of pop ulation, although probably less than in the case of privately built projects. This condition seems to prevail in most new countries where no systema tic or well-planned effort has been made to con trol the character of settlement. Under the Rec lamation Act it was not lawful to designate in advanci the qualifications of the homestead entryman or the purchaser of a farm unit irrigated at government expense. The assump tion of the law has been in general that each citizen should have an equal opportunity with out discrimination. Experience has shown that better results might perhaps have been obtained had it been practicable to set certain conditions of physical and financial ability and experience in handling an irrigated farm. In this connec tion, however, it is interesting to note from a recent investigation on several reclamation pro jects, that the average number of settlers to a farm unit ranged from 1.14 where conditions were favorable to 1.68 where conditions were unfavorable, with a general average of 1.49; showing, for Federal projects at least, that there is little basis for the statement so often made that "throughout the newer parts of America at least three settlers in succession attempt to develop a farm before one succeeds.)) Assuming that the government gets back its investment or the greater part of it, there is no question but that the risk has been justified, even though the interest and a large part of principal is lost. The lands irrigated are situated in the more remote and sparsely settled parts of the United States and their occupation makes possible the development of other industries and the utilization of natural resources which otherwise might be untouched. There is thus a large indirect gain not merely in material prosperity, but in building up communities of praducers whose efforts con tribute not merely to the wealth of the nation, but more than this to the production of more vigorous types of citizenship. For crops in this region see DRY FARMING.