interests can be avoided or harmonized. The rights of water which have given so much trouble in other countries, where the laws regulating these rights have grown up with their system of irrigation, and, as history teaches us, have often been made for the benefit of private parties or particular districts of country, can be established beforehand, if not for all time, at least, on the principle of "the greatest good for the greatest number.

12. That, while the irrigation of these plains would probably be effected in the cheapest and most thorough manner by a comprehensive system of canals, such as we have sketched, we by no means recommend that all irrigation should await the development of such a system. We are taught, by the experience of other countries, to expect such development to be the work of many years. In the mean time, ten or twenty or fifty farmers having lands so situated as to be irrigable from a neighboring stream, may desire to construct the works necesfor that purpose, to be operated for their benefit, or they may desire to enter into an agreement with other parties, who shall build the required works. In either case, if the proposed works do not conflict with the general system of irrigation, we believe that such an enterprise should be permitted and encouraged by the State.

sary

13. As a matter of public policy, it is desirable that the land and water should be joined together, never to be cut asunder; that the farmers should enjoy in perpetuity the use of the water necessary for the irrigation of their respective lands; that when the land is sold, the right to water shall also be sold with it, and that neither should be sold separately.

14. That the parties chiefly benefited by irrigation are the farmers or land-owners. That there is every reason to believe that the value of land in the driest districts will be appreciated many fold; that it results from this that the lands should, as far as possible, pay for the construction of the necessary works.

15. That the State and counties will be directly benefited by the appreciation of land, and by the increase of wealth in their revenues from taxation. That, consequently, it may be good policy for them to aid such enterprises.

16. That there is this difficulty in the way of the proposition that the lands shall pay for the canals, namely, that in many places the lands at present are not worth more than $5

FARMERS SHOULD OWN CANALS.

317

per acre, if so much, and that the irrigation-works may cost $10 per acre.

17. That whatever aid is given by the State or county, should be extended in a cautious way. That in many parts of the country where irrigation will ultimately best repay expenditure, there are now no people; that the population must be imported, the houses, barns, and equipments of the farms, must be created before returns can follow the investment. That for these reasons, we must look for a comparatively slow development of the country.

18. That while we believe, as we have already stated, that the best policy is for farmers to build and own the canals, we also believe that where the farmers are unable to build, and where the State is unable or unwilling to build, it may be, and it probably will be, the best policy to invite the aid of private enterprise. We refer to numerous instances in Spain and Italy, where this system is now in successful operation, in support of our opinion.

19. That private companies undertaking such enterprises, should be subjected to certain conditions, some of which are as follows:

That after a stated period, the franchise shall lapse in favor of the State, or of the irrigators; or that, after a certain period, the State shall have the right to purchase, on certain previouslydefined conditions. That the price of water shall be fixed by agreement, each party in interest being represented by arbiters. That the State shall have the right to charter an association of irrigators to administer the works, the company merely selling the water, and having nothing to do with it after it leaves the channels, the association making all arrangements for its distribution, and for the collection of the water-rates. This latter provision has several advantages: It relieves the company from the odious duty of discriminating in times of scarcity, and from the endless disputes which attend the distribution of water, and puts the responsibility where it belongs-on the irrigators. It favors each irrigator; for he becomes a member of a company, which is strong enough to stand up for its rights in any contest with the capitalists.

For a successful system of this kind, we refer to the "Association for irrigation in the Vercelles, Italy," given elsewhere in this report. That we see no reason why the rights of farm

ers and the rights of capitalists may not be adjusted by some such plan, on the basis of justice and of mutual interest. We observe that the conditions just referred to place a company of capitalists in the light of temporary owners, and that they contemplate a period when the works shall be owned by the State, or by the farmers.

20. That there is no reason to suppose that, for a long time, capital will look upon this kind of investment with favor. The financial history of most irrigating enterprises in other countries, is not favorable, so far as the interests of the shareholders are concerned. It may be a question for the State to consider whether it is a good policy to offer any special inducements in aid of such enterprises.

21. That the relation of the United States to the irrigation of California, is for the most part indirect, but that, in the southern end of the valley, between Visalia and Bakersfield, and south of this town, it is believed that the United States own many thousand acres of lands which are capable of irrigation; that most of this land cannot be cultivated under existing circumstances; that it has no value, except for pasturage, during part of the year; that, if irrigated, its value would be increased many fold; that under these circumstances, it may be a question whether the United States ought not, in some way, to encourage the irrigation of these lands.

22. That when any canals are built, the State should establish a system of inspection, by which a proper construction shall be assured; that the quantity of water to be taken from a river at its mean stage, for the irrigation of a definite quantity of land, should be fixed by a reasonable rule, so that those who come later shall not find all the water taken up, and so that proper drainage shall be secured.

23. That such supervision will probably be distasteful to the parties concerned; that, nevertheless, we believe it is essential to future prosperity, and that its neglect now will bring a fruitful crop of contentions in the future, will delay the development of the country, and that by making irrigation unhealthful, it may make it odious.

24. That the water-rights of the streams now taken up for mining purposes in the mountains, do nɔt conflict with the irrigation of the plains, the water being returned to the natural channels above the points where it will be taken out for irrigation, at least for many years to come.

:

QUANTITY OF WATER REQUIRED.

319

CHAPTER XX.

THE IRRIGATION PROBLEM.

"Irrigation commenced in necessity, and has been pursued ever since for profit. It is not an experiment resting upon the future to prove its advantage or uselessness, but a success, tested by the most careful inquiry, made by the most civilized nations of the world."-Hon. M. M. Estee. COST OF IRRIGATION-LOSS BY ABSORPTION-AMOUNT OF WATER REQUIRED PER ACRE -AMOUNT USED IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES-PRIMARY, SECONDARY, AND TERTIARY DITCHES-BASES OF ESTIMATES-OWNERSHIP OF WATER-MR. ESTEE'S VIEWS CONCERNING LEGISLATION-ITALIAN AUTHORITIES QUOTED-DR. RYER'S HINTS TOWARD A SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM —— IRRIGATION AND PUBLIC HEALTH.

FROM the annual address given before the State Agricultural Society in September, 1874, we have, with the author's consent, taken not only the heading of the following chapter, but much of its contents. Indeed, so little can be added to the report of the commissioners so liberally quoted, and to Mr. Estee's presentation of the subject, that we deem it for the interest of those most deeply concerned in the solution of this great problem, to content ourselves with the effort to extend their benefits. The Commissioners have thus counted the cost of irrigation:

Before making an estimate of the cost of canals, it is necessary to inquire how much water is required to irrigate an acre of land. It will readily be understood that the quantity will depend upon a number of considerations, such as the character of the soil, whether sandy or clayey; upon the character of the substratum, whether pervious or impervious; and upon the depth of inclination of an impervious stratum. It will also depend upon the character of the cultivation. Rice and sugar fields, vegetable-gardens, orchards, and meadows require more water than cereals.

The present staples of this country are cereals. There is some cotton and tobacco cultivation, which will probably be extended; and, with abundance of water, we shall doubtless have a good deal of alfalfa or lucerne grass. Every farmer will have a little orchard, and will raise the vegetables required for home consumption.

The evaporation is high in the interior valleys of the State, quite equal to that in Madrid, where it is about thirteen inches in July. The amount of water lost by absorption in the bed and banks of the canal, is an unknown and variable quantity. In the absence of extra data upon these points, we may for the present adopt the rule laid down by engineers for other countries of similar climate, and estimate the loss of water from these causes at fifteen per cent.

The rivers of California generally run full for about seven months. The rains of the winter increase their discharge, and the melting of the snows keeps it up, so that we may say that the streams from the Sierra Nevadas are well supplied with water from December to

August. The streams from the coast range have no snow reservoirs of much extent, and are generally dry in summer.

Let us assume that the streams on the east side of the valley are well supplied with water for two hundred days in the year, and, to make up for the overestimate on this point, let us neglect their flow for the remainder of the year.

How much land ought a cubic foot of water, supplied every second for two hundred days, to irrigate?

We will make a further supposition that the water is used for fourteen hours out of the twenty-four. Irrigation at night is practiced in other countries, and we may be assured that in seasons of scarcity it will be here, if it shall prove necessary to save the crops. One day's supply will put twelve inches of water over an acre, or two inches of water over six acres, and in two hundred days a supply of a cubic foot per second, will cover two hundred acres with twelve inches of water.

Wheat planted in October or November on summer-fallowed land, well watered when the rivers are high, will probably make a good crop without further watering, except what it gets from the winter rains, even when they prove scanty.

Wheat planted in January or February will probably need one or two irrigations, or three inches each to make a crop. Wheat or barley planted later, and with irrigating facilities, (there seems to be no reason why, in these hot valleys, the sowing-time may not be extended to April,) will probably ripen with twelve inches of water judiciously applied. We know that good crops of wheat are raised without irrigating, when there is a rain-fall of twelve inches, or even less, which comes at the required times.

On the tule or reclaimed lands, barley sowed after wheat harvest has been gathered comes to maturity.

The water required for cotton will probably not exceed that necessary for wheat. Rice cultivation is so unhealthful that its introduction into California will hardly be looked upon with favor.

Alfalfa, if cut five times for hay, will require twelve inches of water or more, depending on the nature of the soil; this in addition to the usual rain-fall.

There is another point to be considered. The whole of the land commanded by the canal will not be irrigated; some of it will be waste or unsuitable for cultivation; some will be fallow, and if we add the areas taken up by the roads, fences, buildings, farm-yards, etc., we ought, according to experience elsewhere, to deduct one fourth, at least, from the irrigable lands. This deduction, we assume, will make up for any kind of cultivation, such as gardens, orchards, etc., requiring larger supplies of water.

Our opinion is, therefore, that a reasonable allowance for the land commanded by the canals is one cubic foot a second for each two hundred acres.

In seasons when there is a great surplus of water, there can be no objection to a more liberal use of it, but it seems to us indispensable that the State should lay down a general rule. There ought to be an established allotment, which may vary in different districts. The cultivators who came first ought not to be allowed to appropriate