Laserfiche WebLink
<br />stlMMA.RY REPORT <br /> <br />therein, was based on field surveys made in 1942. The field data were <br />known to be obsolete in some re$pects by 1951, but new surveys were not <br />felt to be justified at that time. It was explained in the report that <br />"In the definite plan investigations that would precede any construction <br />work undertaken by the Bureau of Recla7lll'l.tion, a detailed survey would be <br />made of projeot lands and the Bureau r s development plana would be adjusted <br />as necessary." <br /> <br />The detailed investigations that were initiated followiIIg project <br />authorization brought to light extensive changes, that have taken plaoe <br />since the survey of 1942 was made. Briefly stated, of the 15,150 acres <br />planned to be irrigated by the project extension' on the basis of the 1942 <br />survey, about 8,730 acres in small scattered tracts are either now irri- <br />gated or with lllinor exceptions can be irrigated through a continuation of <br />the expansion program of the lIInt'lowners 01' irrigation companies. The <br />remaining 6,420 acres in the J.951 plan would have been served by an <br />enJ.argement and extension of the King ConsoJ.ida.ted Canal. Detailed land <br />classification and drainage investigations of these lands together with <br />other lands in the vicinity that could be irrigated through an enlarge.. <br />ment and extendon of the King Consolidated Canal were made in 1956-57. <br />A totaJ. of 21,900 acres was classified. Of' these none were class 1, 610 <br />acres were class 2, and 4,630 acres were class 3, Illak:I.ng a totaJ. of only <br />5,240 acres of class :; or better land. Followir18 appropria.te eliminations <br />expla1ned in a later section of this report, the class 2 land was reduced <br />to 380 acres and the class:; to 2,120 acres, for a totaJ. of 3,100 acres. <br />A careful economic analysis showed that the cost of providir18 irrigation <br />service to this reduced land area would be greater than the resulting <br />benefits, and the lands were found incapable of paying operation and <br />maintenance costs of project works. Either of these findings would pre- <br />vent a recollllllendation for construction of irr:l.gation facilities as a <br />FederaJ. recJ......tion development. <br /> <br />Abandonment of plans for FederaJ. construction of the Pine River <br />project extension w:I.ll leave the Pine River project as it was init1all.y <br />planned. It was then intended that necessary distribution works would <br />be provided by the landowners and irrigation companies and by the Indian <br />agency. As the reservoir was completed, however, and when practically no <br />progress had. been made in extending :l.rrigation to new areas, FederaJ. con- <br />struction of the necessary c..n~' s and lateraJ.s under an extension of the <br />project was thought to be necessary. In retrospect it can now be seen <br />that this lack of rapid progress by private interests resulted in part <br />from the generaJ.J.y depressed state of agrieuJ.ture during the 1930' s that <br />J.eft the farmers with limited means to undertake :l.rr:l.gation expansion. <br />Shortly thereafter dry-farm production of """"1 grains was stimulated <br />by the high prices for grain that prevailed during World War II, thus <br />lessening the f'arn1ers' inducement to extend irriga.tion to the:l.r a.rable <br />dry land that was producing grain. These two retarding factors were <br />not permanent and as economic conditions became more normal ditches were <br />gradually extended to bring more land under :l.rr:l.gation. In a number of <br /> <br />2 <br /> <br />,I <br />