ANNUAL PRECIPITATION 2 TO 30 INCHES ® ANNUAL PRECIPITATION 30 TO 80 INCHES •
U. S. Weather Bureau
DEDICATED TO THE TASK OF PROVIDING ADEQUATE WATER FOR A PROFITABLE AND DIVERSIFIED IRRIGATION AGRICULTURE IN WESTERN AMERICA-AN EXPAN· SION OF WAR FOOD PRODUCTION THROUGH MORE IRRIGATION-THE CREATION OF NEW FARM OPPORTUNITIES AND THE STABILIZATION OF DROUGHT AREAS.
VOL. VIII. HO.
3
1119
NATIONAL PRESS BUILDING, WASHINGTON 4,
D.
C.
January
20, 1944
TIre PRE3InENTtS BUDGET PROPOSES
$16,434,770
FOR RECLAM&TION.
When the Presidentts Budget for the fiscal yea.r
1945
reached Congress last week
it
was
found that only
$16,434,770
was proposed to advance the Irrigation War Food
Program.
This is the smallest amount proposed for many years, due lar ge ly to two
causes.
(1)
Because construction had been at a standstill for nearly a year many
projects have a greater than usual unexpended balance available.
(2) The Bureau of
the Budget has decided not to submit budget figures for any irrigation project until
it has been approved as a War Food Project by the War Production Board.
It is anticipated that as the War Production Board approves additional projects,
those not having sufficient unexpended balances will be favored by the Bureau of the
Budget sending to Congress supplemental budget estinates to cover their construction
requirement s •
The
1945
Budget Fieures are as follows:
Irrigation War Food Budget for Fiscal Year
1945
OFFICERS O. S. WARDEN. PRESIDENT
Operation and Mlintenance
Authorized from Power Revenues
Reclamation Fund Construction
Deschutes Project, Oregon
General Investigations
Administration
E~penseGeneral Account
Colorado River Front Work
Colorado River Development Fund
General
~lndConstruction
Central Valley, California
Colorado Big-Thompson, Colorado
Anderson Ranch, Idaho
Lugert-Altus, Oklahoma
Yakima, Roza, Washington
General Investigation
Administration Expense
$3,261,500
water Conservation and Utilization Projects
Reclamation Trust Fund Advances for O.
&
M.
GRANTI TOTAL
DIRECTORS HUGO B. FARMER. YUMA. ARIZONA
ORA BUNDY. FIRST VICE·PRESIDENT
H. D. STRUNK. Me COOK. NEBRASKA A. M. SMITH. CARSON CITY. NEVADA
$1,273,000
1,250,000
375,000
150,000
1,775,000
50,000
425,000
3,695,000
~
1,437,000
2,500,000
545,000
700,000
500,000
375,000
2,000,000
$15,275,000
1,179,570
$16,434,770
ROBERT W. SAWYER. SECOND VICE·PRESIDENT J. A. FORD. TREASURER
F.O HAGlE. SECRETARY·MANAGER
J. R. FAUVER. EXETER. CALIFORNIA CLIFFORD H. STONE. DENVER. COLORADO N. V. SHARP. FILER. IDAHO
E. PORTER AHRENS. SCANDIA. KANSAS
E. W. BOWEN. TUCUMCARI. NEW MEXICO HARRY E. POLK. WILLISTON. NORTH DAKOTA FRANK RAAB. CANTON. OKLAHOMA
ROBERT W. SAWYER. BEND. OREGON MILLARD G. SCOTT. PIERRE. SOUTH DAKOTA MILTON E. DANIEL. BRECKENRIDGE. TEXAS ORA BUNDY. OGDEN. UTAH
J. A. FORD. SPOKANE. WASHINGTON
Bulletin No. 3--2
It is of interest to know that money for investigations comes from three dif ...
ferent fun
d
s, as follows:
Reclamation Fund
Colorado Deveiopment Fund
General Fund
A GEORGE H. MAXWELL
BE1~FIT$
375,000
425,000
500,000
$1,300,000
Forty-five years ago George
H.
Maxwell" now an aged and helpless invalid, livi..'Ylg
with his wife in Phoenix, Arizona, was the keen and aggressive Executive Dir8ctor of
the first National Recla.mation Association.
It was George Maxwell" supported by the
members of that Association, who sold the idea of a Federal Reclamation Program
.
to
the country and to Congress, who helped write the first Reclamation Act nnd secured
its passage by ConGress in 1902.
Every Federal Reclamation Project and all water users everywhere are indebted
to George
H.
Maxwell for this early Evangelistic work for irrigation, water
conserva-tion and flood control throughout the naconserva-tion.
When the present National Reclamation Association convened in
Pho~nix
in 1941
it honored George YJB.xwell by presenting him a testimonial of appreciation. At that
time numerous friends made substantial contrib'ltions which were used to
·
save the
unpretentious t1ax
w
ell home from being sold for taxes. Mutual friends now advise that
further financial aid is necessary.
Mr.
A. L. Arpin of Crowley, Louisiana and
Mr, H.
B. Wilkinson of Phoenix,
old-time friends of the Maxwells, who have been looking after his interests and who
advised this office of his dire need,
hav~agreed with Mrs, Y
n
xwell
ts
consent to
send postage prepaid one each of about
a
dozen of Maxwell's books and pupars (some
of which have real historical interest) to those who see fit to assist
Mi~.and 0xs.
M
a
xwell financif.1.11y at this time. This office will be glad to receive
a
nd pass on
to
Mr.
Arpin and
Mr.
Wilkinson any contributions which members of this Association
care to make!!
Checks should be made payable to Mrs. George
H.
Yaxwell.
Thanks for
your help to Geor ge Maxwe
11 S
_
Fill Out
JDetach
fUldi""ai 1 Now
.
.
... . ···,·· .... · .... ···· .. ···_···.··t.····.;11,,.····_· ... · ... ... ... ... ... .. .. ... , •. , ... ..
National
R6:Clama tion As soc ia ti on
1119
N
ational Press Building
Washin
g
ton 4,
D.
c.
Gentle
m
en:
Re: George
H.
Maxwell Benefit Fund
Please find enc lased herewith
$
in check
0,
ca.sh
0,
money order
0,
pay
a.
bl
e
to Mrs. Georg
e
H.
M
e
.xwe11 for application to the George
H.
I13.xwell Benefit
fund.
The Max
w
ell papers and publications should be mailed to me at the address below.
Name
Street or
R.F.D.
Number
Bulletin No. 3--3
PROGRESS REPORT ON WESTERN IRRIGATION WAR FOOD PROJECTS, JA}WARY 13, 1944
Eighteen Projects
App~oved,
QY
the War Production Board,
All Amerioan, California, 9/24/43
Madera Canal, California,
5/10/43
Klamath Modoc-California
and
Ore., 7/24/43
Colorado Big-Thompson, Colorado, 7/24/43
Mancos, Colorado, 7/24/43
Anderson Ranch, Idaho
Post Falls, Idaho, 12/8/43
Bitter Root, Montana, 11/22/43
Intake, 11ontana, 11/22/43
Dodson Pumping, Montana, 12/4/43
Deschutes, Oregon,
9/24/h3
Rapid Valley, South Dakota, 7/24/43
Balmorhea, Texas, 12/23/43
Newton, Utah, 7/24/43
Provo River, Utah, 10/12/43
Salt
Rive~
Aqueduct, Utah, 10/11/43
Scofield, Utah, 7/1/43
Roza, Washington, 7/24/43
Eight Projects Disapproved by the War Production Board.
Friant-Kern Canal, California, 8/2/43
Savage, Montana, 12/6/43
Mirage Flats, Nebraska, 8/13/43
*Ylli~a
Levee, Arizona,
9/13/43
*Billings Drainage, Montana, 8/18/43
*Riverton, Wyoming, 9/17/43
Tucumcari, New Mexico, 9/23/43
Al tus, Ok1ah.oma, 1/5/44
Four Projects Approved by War Food Administration and Pending Before W.P.B.
La Plata, Colorado, 10/27/43
Cambridge, nebraska, 9/28/43
Humboldt, Nevada, 9/13/43
Williston, North Dakota, 8/18/43
Twenty-Six Projects Recommended by Bureau to War Food Administration for Study
aJd Recommendation to the War Production Board.
I
Gila, Arizona, 7/15/43
Cardua, California, 7/16/43
Willows, California, 7/20/43
Paonia, Colorado, 9/9/43
Pine River, Colorado, 7/15/43
Silt, Colorado, 7/20/43
Payette, Idaho,
7/6/43
Oneida, Idaho, 7/23/43
Bostwick, Kansas, 7/15/43
Kanapolis, Kansas, 7/15/43
Buffalo Rapids - Fallon Uni t, Montana
·
, 7/2/43
Fort Belknap, Montana, 7/23/43
Missoula Valley-Big Flat Unit, Montana, 7/20/43
North Side Low Lift, Montana 8/20/43
U-Bar-N, Montana, 7/20/43
South Bench,
!1ontana,
7/19/43
Tongue River, Montana, 7/20/43
Frenchman, Nebraska, 12/1/43
Fort Sumner, New Mexico, 7/15/43
Canton, Oklahoma, 7/15/43
Bully Creek, Oregon, 7/19/43
Angostura, South Dakota, 8/6/43
Santa Clara, Utah, 7/19/43
Weber Delta, Utah,
7/~9
43
Burbank, Washington,
7
23/43
Paintrook, Wyoming,
7
23/43
Shoshone, Heart Mountain, Wyoming, 8/14/43
* -
Rejected by Governmental Division of the War Production Board.
Respectfully submitted,
A90
The Demobilization Problem in 17 Western
States
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. VICTOR WICKERSHAM
OF· OKLAHOMA
IN THE HOUSP; OF ltEPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, Januar1/ 11, 1944
Mr. WICKERSHAM. Mr. Speaker,
under leave to extend my remarks tn the
RECORD,I include the following letter and
article:
NATIONAL RECLAMATION AsSOCIATION,
Washington, D: C., December 31, 1943.
Senators, ConfJressmen, Governors 01 the
17
arid and semiarid States.
GENTLEMEN: Re the demobilization prob-lem in 17 Western States I am enclOsing herewith copy of a statement on' the .rela
-tive severity of the post-war demob1llzation 'of 'servicemen and industrial workers by
State~, as taken from the Monthly Labor Review of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
It is bel1eve4 that to the extent that the irrigation, reclamation, and water conserva-tion programs of your· State can b~ prepllored to absorb those demob1I1zed from the services ,and from war industry, that every effort sl10Uld be made to' bring that about. We
kilow of rio_ more impOrtant Ill: .natr:1oti.o.
,services which can be remiered during 194.4
[than' in preparing worth-while Nation-bu~ld Ing employment for the immediate post-war
period. .
Now is the time to press potential post-war reclamation projects, and of course your cooperation iIi adva~clng projects is always helpful.'
S~ncere1y yours.
F. O. HAGlE,
Secretary-Manager .
[From the Monthly Labor Review (July 1943) of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor,]
RELATIVE SEVERITY OF POST-WAll
DEMOBILIZA-TION BY' STATES
The'relative severity of the post-war de-mobilization problem for each State may be said to depend, ~pon the size of ita excess
labors~pply dur,ing the reconversion period. in relation to its pre-war capacity to provide
,employment: It may therefore be measured by the 'ratio of the total number of demobi-lized persons in th:e State to the employment In 1940. The group of demob1l1zed persons w1ll include members of the armed services Wh<;> may be expected to return to the State, as well as Industrial workers within its bor-ders who will lose their jobs as war produc-tion is curtailed.
This' article gives an estimate of the re-employment problem presented in the vari-ous States by these demobilized, perso1;ls7
The estimate depends upon four assump.,. tiona, which are not intended as' predictions but do provide aconyenient basis for a pre-llminary 'analysis: (1) That 'the war w1l1 be ended both in Europe and Asia by Decem-ber 1944, at the peak of the war production.
effort; (2) that the United States will main-tain an armed force of 2,500,000 in the early pqst-war years; (3) that war production w1ll be rapidly curtailed to the level of post-war defense requirements; and (4) that indus. trial reconversion and expansion to high levels -()f civilian production will proceed as rapidly as physical and technological f{tctors will allow, with no delays caused by financial difficulties or uncertainty of markets .. Vse of ,this last assumption means that the mag-nitude of the ~oming reemployment prob-lem'is" if anything, understated.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-APPENDIX
JANUARY
11
As is'indicated in the map on page 2 there are dramatic contrasts In the severity. of the demobill~a t115iiPtVOians which, the dIf-ferent States will experience. Michigan, with its converted automobile industry, will have the graves~ s·ituation. It appea,rs that there will be almost 6 ex-servicemen or former war workers for every 10 persons employed in the State in 1940. CQnnectlcut, lo~g
a
center of the munition/!? industry, wiil also be seri-ously affected, with a ratio of demoblUzed persons to pre-war employment of' nearly 49 percent.· Washington and Indiana Will have ratios of 45 percent.The ftext group includes eight States in which the problem of demob1l1zation will be somewhat less severe, with demoQilization
.ratios ranging' from over 35 to 42 percent. These States are California, Kansas, Mary-.land, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Utah.
In a considerably larger group, containing 17 Statelj, the impact of demoblllzation wm be relatively llghter, either' because the volume of war industry is n9t very large or because the high pre-war level of peacetime employment offers a relatively favorable pros-pect of absorbing the surplus. The demobi-lization rates fot these ,States- Alabaqla,
,Colorado, Delaware; Illinois, LOUisiana, M!tfne, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and
Wiscon-'sin- range between 24.7 and 34.3 percent.
It is significant that even in·the 20 remain-ing States' (i.ncluding the' District of Colum-bia) with ratios under -24.7 percent, tne
demobilization problem w1ll in no case be less than 19 percent of pre-war employment. 'fhese States comprise a large part of the South and southwest, as well as of the north-ern plain and northwest mountain areas. In these regions the development of war in-dustry haS been light, and the ohief problem w1llbe the plaCing of returned seJvicemen.
'l"hree generai comments are relevant .. First in' no State is the problem negligible. A sudden expansion, In the labor' supply of only one-fifth, r~tive to' normal labor re-qUirements, is enough' to cause serious dis-turbance unless foreseen, and prepa:red, for. Second, the gravity qf the problem for each State will depend chiefly on the expansion of the industrial base during the war, since the
demob~lized servicemen 'wlll constitute· a faltly constant prOportion of th~ population and of the pre-war employment in each State. Third, even_ where the problem is ~t
acute over the State as a whole, there may be violent local ' dislocations for which .preparation wlll be necessary.
NUMBER OF DEMOBn.IZED PERSON~ BY STATES In the accompanying ta,ble are, given the' estimates upon the basis of which, 1ihe map was ·constructed. The national total. of 8,-500,000 men to be demob1l1zed from the armed services is derived by subtracting the assumed'
.. 2,500,000 post-war armed force from the pub. -lished estimates of a peak armed' force' of 11,000,000. The State totals were derived by dividing the 8,500,000 national total according to '1940 State population ratiOS, adjusted for sex and age distribution.. It was assumed.
that servicemen will r~turn to the States from which they were inductee..
The Il'ational total of slightly over 6,000,000 demoblllzed, industrial workers· was' derived by estimating .for each of'.14 mantffacturing industries (1)' a rate of contraction of'muni-' .tions' prodUction, and (2) the most rapid possible rate of expansion of clvllian
produc-.tton; b . explained above; and totaling the differences between December 1944 employ-ment . and· lowest subsequent employment ,for each industry. The number of demo-bilized ind.ustrial wQ,rkers in. each State was derived by c~mputlng ratios of State to total employment in December 1944 for separate manufacturing· industries, 'from forecasts of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' and the Bu-reau of Employment Securfty, or from census data; applying these ratios to the',indicated total' demobiUzati6ii ,tor ea~h industry; and,
totaling the results, for each State. This assumes that demobilized industrial workers will, in the first instance,. constitute a.. prob-lem for the States' where theY'held war jobs, either by ljieeking new jobs,. drawing unem-ployment compensation or rellef, requiring retraining services, or in other ways.
If a.count of war jobs is made
on
the basiS, 1'1otot
war industry but of war output not required In the post-war period-ships and planes in excess of peacetime needs, and ordnance itemg such as guns" ammunit~on,and tanks-a smaller national total (4,600,000) of industrIal gemob1l1zation is obtaIned. This, however, would understate the industrial demob1l1zation problem for the 'Nation as a whole and-for all' but 11 States, since In mos~ cast;s the number of workers permanently dlsplaced by the cOn-traction of specialized ,munittOl).s production will be less than the number temporarlly -disemployed by the reconversion of war in· dustry in the broader sense. ' ,
It should be noted' that the flg-ttres on In-dustr.ial demob111zation miniIXllze the actual
-reemployment problem in the sense that they do not include job ,shifts within a given in-dustry which produce no net contraction of employment. It should also be observed 'that all demobll1Zation figures a.re totals for the reconversion period as&' whole and do not. measure unemploym~nt. at any pa'rticular time.
Military and industrial demobiliZation,
re-lated, to Fe-war employment, /01' the 17 "Western States 1
Number of. persons' Demo-(in ~housands) bilized persons State 1949 Demobilized persons 88 cent of per·
em· Indus- 100)
ploy· Armed trial em·, ment' forces work· Total ploy-ers ment
- -- -
-Arizona:~ ____ •• _ 150,2 32.3 1.1 33A 22.2 C~lifornia ___ ~ •• _ 2,526.3 482.0 ri77.6 1,059.6 42.0 Colorado~ ___ ••• _ 349.7 70.6 22.4 98.0 26.6 tdaho: ___ •••• ~ •• 158.6 34.0 .2 34.2 21.6
KansftS ___ •• "I_ •• • 583;S lOS.S Ill. 0 'cl19.S 37.6
Montana_ •••••• _ 185.6 36.6 2.2 38.S 20.9 Nebraska_ ••• ~_. 433.4 ' 79.9 18.0 97.9 22.6 Nevada ______ ._. 41.6 'S.6 1.6 10.0 24.1 New Mexico_'~ •• 140.3 33.2, .3 33.5 23,9 North Dakota_. 200.4 40,0 .1 • 40,1 20.0 Ok18hoi:na _____ .~ 658.7 145.4 46.1 191. 5 29.1 lOregon _______ :' •• 389.8 70.6 58.5 129.1 33.1
.South Dakota TexaS _______ "_ __ • •• ' 204.5 39.1 .2 39.3 19.2 2,138.4 423.3 140.7 564.0 28.4 Utah ________ ••••. 148.9 34.0 19.7 (1,7 36,1 ,Washington ___ ;. -007.7 115.6 158.9 274.~ 45.2 Wyomlng __ •••• _ 86.6 17.S 0 17.8 20.6 17 Western
- - - -
'
-
- -
-
,
-
'
-..,... states _______ 1 9, 003: 4,1, 771. 7 1,158.5 2,930.2 32.5I Based on Relative Severity of Post·war DeIl;lobili.
retion by States, Monthly Labor Review (July 1943)
o( the Bureau of Labor Statistics. , 2 From 1940 Census of Population.
•
~~~~~11~
~
« d
~~L
7 t +
6 +
-
s+----~
~"
t)4+---~~
").~~
~~
2 f - - - +
VALUE Of DOMESTIC EXPORTS
Of THE
UNITED STATES
I~~~-+--~~---~---ISI/S /Q30 ISl4SVALuE Of IMPORTS
Of
THE
UNITED STATES
/Sl4C a~---r---~INDEX NUMBERS Of QUANTITIES
110 - t - - - . . - - + 160
('.,0
\l ~/ZO~
~/OO . ~80"
~'o...
All A!Jriculfurt11 Exports 40+---~---~---+_--~Or---_4----~---+_---_4---~ /,,~o /SIU160~---~~---~---~---INDEX NUMBERS Of QUANTITIES
1.f0
or
AGRICULTURAL IMPORTS
"
~,
ZD+---t---+---:=rNon-compel
it
ive - -~,'
~ ~
...
-
...
""
~ ~/()(), ' - - '
~ ~eo+---'\{6c1
All A~r/(;ulfur"lImports
~
4m----~--+_----_;---~-~r--~---_; aO~--~~~---~---~+---~~~r_---~TABLE II
Acrieultural Exports and Imports of the United States. Index Numbers and Quantities.
(1924-29=100)
EXPORts IMPORTS
Year becinning
July All COID- ExcluClive All COID-
Non-CoDl-lDoditi_ of Cotton lDoditiee COlDpetitive petitive
1918
124
180
61
....
..
..
.
...
.
. .
1919
115
146
87
....
..
.
.
... .
1920
109
149
61
... ...
.
.
1921
117
154
73
... ...
.
...
.
.
1924-29
100
100
100
100
100
1932
75
50
79
60
94
1935
57
40
103
98106
1936
51
36
116
118
115
1937
70
70
92
80
102
1938
57
70
91
77
102
1939
63
50
102
87
113
1940..".
25
34
128
104
146
-4-The Livingston Enterprise, Friday, March 3, 1944
Missouri
River
Report Lacks
FDR Approval
r
WASHINGTON, March
3-(lP)-Budget Director Harold
R.
Smith
said today that the method
pro-posed by army engineers for
har-"
nessing the Missouri river does not
f
fit in with the program of
Presi-dent Roosevelt "at least at the
_
present."
The army engineers have
pro-posed construction of
12
multiple-purpose dams as well as a system of
levees-estil}lated to cost
$490,000,-oOO-to
pr~videflood control,
irri-gation~
navigation and power
de-velopment.
In
a letter to Secretary of War
Henry
L.Stimson, Smith said:
"1
have taken the proposed
(army engineers) report up with
the president and while there would
be no objection to your submitting
it to the congress for its
informa-tion, if you wish to do so at this
time, the authorization of
"
the
im-provements recommended therein
by the chief of engineers would not
be in accord with the program of
the president, at least at the
pres-ent."
"
Smith said he would give further
advice after the budget bureau
re-views a report from the reclamation
bureau expected to be completed
May
1,
detailed estimates of
addi-tional appropriations to be
sub-mitted by the agriculture
depart-ment and federal power
commis~sion, and further data from the
army engineers.
"
Smith's letter was included when
Stimson officially transmitted the
army engineers report to congress
and Speaker Rayburn
(D-Tex)or-dered it be printed and
-
referred to
the flood control committee. The
report also is known as the Pick
re-port.
Smith said that there was a
dif-erence of opinion between army
engineers and the
"
reclamation
bu-reau over use and control of waters
"
of the Mississippi and its
tribu-taries and that the exact nature
of the differences could not be
as-certained until the reclamation
bu-reau's report is received.
Smith
~aidthe agriculture
"
de-partment estimated an additional
$350,000,000 would be required for
its
land-use program in the area
to supplement the army engineers'
plan for·expending $490,000,000 and
these, along with already
author-ized expenditures of $171,000,000 for
levees and reservoirs in the lower
basin would bring the total cost of
carrying out all plans to more than
$1,000,000,000.
The budget director said he
re-quested the engineers to show the
ultimate relationship between its
plan, a proposed nine foot channel
below Sioux City, la., and upstream
uses of the water
resources
of the
basin.
Press Views on Missouri River Plan
AN INTERRELATED
PROBLE~IFrom the Casper (Wyo.) Tribune-Herald.
In a challenge addressed "To the Editors of the Missouri Valley," the St. Louis
Post-Dispatch presents the river as "one
big problem" which must be solved by a plan big enough to serve all the construc-tive purposes to which water can be put
i~ addition to providing safeguards against
dIsastrous floods. And with such an objec-tive there can be no quarrel.
The Post-Dispatch speaks out in behalf of a major program and believes that it offers the solution to problems that present
ir;revitable conflict. It passes this conviction
o'n to newspapers throughout the valley
with an urge to meet the challenge. There
is 'much to be said in support of the idea
especially if the plan is based on a firm: policy regarding water use.
Interested primarily in irrigation and power developmelilt, the upper basin states probably could show in the shaping of such a policy that proposed reclamation works
would h~lp stabilize river flow by storing
flood waters and releasing them during the dry season, when the return flow would
aid instead of hinder navigation. More
water would reach the Missouri during the summer under extensive reclamation development than is now available dur-ing the same season.
The lower valley in turn could obtain adequate recognition of navigation and flood-control works, and no one questions the urgent need of the latter. Late floods have accented the necessity of preventing a constant repetition of widespread
disas-ter and t~agedy.
Natural resources of every district stand to benefit from a broad program. Water tables now dangerously low would be lifted, and a great agricultural heritage would be better preserved by various means
demon-"tr~ted by the soil conservation service.
MISSOURI'S SORROW
From the LOltisville Times.Chinese .call one of China's great rivers
China's Sorrow, because it gets out of bed at times inconvenient to regions it trav-erses and behaves outrageously.
Missouri River, starting in the Rocky Mountains, where three streams meet, bent on devilment, runs sportively through 2500 miles of abused and resentful territory. In Missouri it drops once-arable sections of Nebraska and more distant states, which it has pl(l.yfully tossed about, and runs around them, making sandbars, lakes, leav-ing sections of stream-bed abandoned. Mis-sourians call the stream the Big Muddy, at times using harsher names.
The St. Louis Post-Dispatch calls on all editors in the Missouri basin, 580,000 square mQ-es, to put their heads together and find what should be done about the Missouri. And if it can get 580,000 square miles of editors to agree on something, the Post-Dispatch will have fame which no in-dividual ever drea.med of having or could, serenely, live with.
the Mis.souri Valley. We are also opposed to wastmg any more money trying to make
t?e Upper Missouri navigable. Our
posi-tIon has been and continues to be that the Federal Government should concentrate on flood control with reasonable facilities for irrigation. In our opinion, numerous small dams on tributaries would be far better than a few big ones on the Missouri itself.
UNIFIED ACTION IS NEEDED
From the Mitchell (S. D.) Daily Republic.It has long been- the contention of this
news.paper that realization of a compre-henSIve and adequate Missouri River de-velopment program depends in a large measure upon unified action by the nine Missouri Valley states and by the advo-cates of the irrigation, navigation and flood control benefits.
'liherefore it is with special pleasure that we reprint an editorial appeal for unified action from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
Though the Post-Dispatch editorial is ad-dressed to the editors of the Missouri Val-ley, the message it contains is of great significance to every person interested in the development program.
As long as the states concerned vie with one another for special benefits or priv-ileges in the course of the river develop-ment; as long as irrigation, navigation and flood control advocates quarrel among tpemselves, the chances for an adequate river program will be retarded.
Only by unified action can an over-all program be accomplished which will pro vide the maximum benefits for all groups and all states involved.
The Post-Dispatch confesses a past error of preoccupation with the interests of its own section, to the exclusion of other
sec-tions of the yalley. It has not been alone
in that error.
It is to be hoped that other interested
groups and individuals will follow the ex-ample which has been set and will read-just their objectives for unified action in a give-and-take program which will insure the maximum benefits to all concerned.
A MOVE TO UNITE VALLEY
Alfred Mynders in the Chattanooga Tim~s.The editorial page of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of May 14 was perhaps unique in
the history of American journalism. It was
devoted to one subject entitled "One River -One Problem," and it was addressed "To the Editors of the Missouri Valley."
The two-column editorial message ad-dressed to the editors urged co-operation to make in the Missouri River Valley an-other Tennessee Valley Authority.
And why did the Post-Dispatch address its editorial page to editors of the Midwest newspapers? Because it wants that whoie territory to realize that it has one river-one problem-and it is through journalism that the Missouri Valley can be united. As
the editorial says: "This is the creative
function of journalism.. This is what edi-tors are for."
TO.~
FROM
National R€clamation Association
National Press Building
Washington, D. C.
OPPOSED TO AN MV A
From the Council Bltilffs (Ia.) Nonpareil.A Missouri Valley Authority, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch maintains, would take all the problems of the river into consideration and reconcile all the conflicting interests up and down the river, as the TVA has done in the valley of the meandering Ten-nessee River.
We are dubious on this point. When the editor of the Nonpareil followed the TVA from one dam to another not so long ago, he was far from convinced that all conflict-ing interests had been reconciled or all problems solved. Our belief is that if the war had not come along, TVA would be under bitter attack from many directions.
We are opposed to any Federal boss of
FOR UNSELFISH CO-OPERATION
From the Mexico (Mo.) Evening Ledger.The St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial on the flood situation in the Missouri Valley was one of those constructive moves that publication launches so often at a time when the need for action impresses every observer. We agree with the Post-Dispatch that something should be done.
We would favor a plan formulated by ccnnpetent representatives of the nine states involved insuring equitable methods to build a fair program of flood control irrigation, navigation and conservation. This can be formulated only by an unself-ish co-operative attitude of all those vitally
For Unity in Missouri River Planning
CJ"M
Mirror
01
""'it
OPinioft
Water to grow crops on 22,000,000 acres of arid land has added
16 billion dollars of national wealth, i1"rigation authority says; with
controversy holding up Missouri River development, the job is only
half done; thinks that there need
be
no conflict with other
uses~From a Statement
by
O. S. Warden, President of the National Reclamation
Association, Before Commerce Committee, United States Senate
The National Reclamation Association, which has an affiliated membership
repre-senting the water interests in 17 Western
states to the west of the ninety-seventh
meridian. was organized 13 years ago to
co-operate with the Federal Bureau of Reclamation and thereby promote the irri-gation of Western lands.
In this great Western area, there has
always been a short water supply. We
need every gallon we can get. We can use all that we have to advantage in the econ-omy and the careful development of land
and water resources, which are the
abid-ing foundation of our progress-state and regional.
Quite naturally. we treasure every flow-ing stream and every storage for future
use. Quite naturally, again, the whole
West is up in arms if there is a proposal to take any of our water hundreds of miles away to be used in another place for a purpose other than the protection of prop-erty or the creation of production values.
Big Increase in Crops
Under the Reclamation Act of 1902, plus
private enterprise, about 22 million acres
of land have been made productive. Crop production has been increased annnally
$625,000,000. Property values have been
created in the amount of 16 billion dollars.
Ninety per cent of our agricultural
pro-duction is used at home. These 17
so-called reclamation states purchase a billion a year in goods and services from outside
their boundaries. If they can have first
use of the water that flows out of their mountains, they will double these pur-chases of goods and services.
Fifteen million people live in these
West-ern states. We can make homes for 15
million more if we are able to build proj-ects, for the most part multiple in char-acter, all of which can meet the test of benefit to the region where they are lo-cated, as well as add to the general wel-fare of the nation,
This great work in the West is just
about half done, We can irrigate 22
mil-lion more acres if we have first use of
the water. We can repay the cost over a
period of years.
Differences in Rainfall
Do not forget the limited water supply. There is a rainfall west of the
ninety-seventh meridian of from five to 30 inches a
year. East of this meridian, there is a
fall of from 30 to 60 inches.
These differentials in rainfall cannot be controlled by man. What we can do is to plan wisely and direct the use of the wa-ter. We can avoid conflicting plans. We
owe this much to ourselves. I am sure
there is an existent responsibility the Con-gress will wish to share.
There have come into the picture appar-ent differences, as plans have been pre-pared by the Army Engineers and the en-gineers of the Burea u of Reclamation for development of the land and water re-sources of the great interstate Missouri River watershed, with its 2500-mUe river system reaching all the way from Three Forks, Mont., to st. Louis.
I
Nine statell are involved-Montana,Wy-oming, North Dakota, South Dakota,
Ne-t braska, Kansas, Mlsaourl, Iowa and
Colo-rado. 'These states have, a regional
asso-ciation organized to settle differences
peacefully. Nine Governors and 16
com-mittee representatives, in conference a few weeks ago, voted unanimously to wait un-til the over-all plan of the engineers of the
Bureau of ~eclamation was ready, and to
urge a co-ordination of all plans into a harmony of policy in advance of action by the Congress.
Lack
,
of Harmony
Now, what has happened? The
engi-neers of the Bureau of Reclamation have finished a five-year study and a plan for
~n over-all development of the entire
Mis-souri watershed, The desired and
re-quested co-ordination has not taken place.
Meanwhile, there are the rivers and'
har-bors bill (H. R. 3961), and the flood
con-trol bill (H. R. 4(85), that distinctly have
to do with the use of the waters of the
Missouri River, pressing ~or legislation
ad-vantage.
This is not the way to get along. These are the reasons we are here supporting an
amendment to H. R. 3961, hoping to clear
the atmosphere and to establish policies that look to mutually satisfactory conclu-sions.
I am sure the people of the West are for irrigation, for flood control and for
im-proving navigation. They firmly believe
there need be no conflict between irriga-tion and flood control, if these purposes are properly put together-that is, with a mutual assistance one to the other.
National Irrigation Policy
Furthermore, if there is a shortage of l'ater for all desired irrigation and navi-gation, there ought to be a reckoning of
resulting values- regional and otherwise.
A blunt question intrudes: Do we need
additional facilities for transportation more than we need self-supporting homes?
My confidence for the future finds strength in the record of Congress as it has prepared land and water legislation all the way through the 140 years follow-ing the Louisiana Purchase.
Under the Homestead Act of 1860 and
the ReclamatiQn Act of 1902, which was
really an amendment to the Homestead
Act, first 160 acres was made available to
the settlers, then 320 acres, and then 640
acres. But without irrigation, settlers
could not make a. living on any sized tract.
In these later. year~, there has been a
narrowing of acreage with diversity of pro-duction a$ irrigation and reclamation have
become a national poliC}". With such 8
record, Congress and the Government can·
not-indeed, will not-wish to back away from the responsibility of today.
The time has arrived to clear away the cobwebs of uncertainty, to define policies and to write legislative definitions of what each Government agency having a part In the development of our land and water
re-sources shall plan to do. Conflicts and
striving for advantage are undesirabl" and unnecessary.
Sf.
LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
91. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
Pou"ded b, ]OS!PH
POL112Bk•••
What We 0we the Upper Valley
The basic obstacle to development of the
Mis-souri Valley was ably stated. in the Post-Dispatch
yesterday by E. G. Leipheimer, editor of the Mon-tana Standard of Butte. "We fear the Govern-ment bureaus," he wrote in an appraisal doubly
valuable for Its candor. "They have all been
here to Investigate our water resources, but al-ways with a view to taking our water away for the use and needs of people elsewhere, far below."
The people of \ the Upper Missouri Valley do
not trust the Government bureaus, and-let us not delude ourselves-they do not trust us of the
Lower Missouri Valley. If we are willing to face
all the facts-which i'8 the only way in which we shall ever get anywhere--\\'e must admit that they have good and sufficient reasons for not trusting us.
We of the Lower Missouri Valley have not been sympathetic to the needs of the Upper Valley states for irrigation. We have not bothel'ed to
infor~ ourselves about Irrigation. We have stood by without protest when measures to develop the Missouri River for our benefit have proposed to penalize the irrigation of the Upper Valley.
The first steps that will have to be taken be-fore the two great subdivisions of the Missouri
'Valley can learn to trust each other are up to
us of the Lower Valley:
First. we must repUdiate, and demand correc-tion, of the inequity of that act of Congress which forbids use of any of the waters of Fort Peck
Reservoir for irrigation. It is not enough to
sug-gest, as the Army Engineers suggest, that when
additional reservoi{s are bunt on the Missouri the waters of Fort Peck may be used for
irriga-tion. Why ,should Montana. Wyoming and the
Dakotas have to trade with us for water that is rightfully theirs? Why should they have to watt on our pleasure for water that is rightfully theirs now?
Second, we must repudiate, and demand with-drawal, of the efforts of the Army Engineers to set aside, by law, a specified amount of the water
of the Missouri River for navigation-to take it
away. by arbitrary act, from irrigation. Such
flagrant disregard of the other fellow can only provoke in him a similarly flagrant disregard for our rights. We need, on both sides, to repudiate the method of grabbing water by congressional second-story w'ork.
When we of the Lower Valley have done these two things, we will have shown ourselves willing to be reasonable. We can then expect our neigh-bors of the Upper Valley to be reasonable toward us in response. Until we have performed these duties, it will be idle to talk of co-operation be-tween us, for we have first to justify tlle trust that makes co-operation possible.
The River-A Common
Pr.obl~mBY TELEGRAPH. To the Editor of the Post-Dispatch:
In demanding that inherent irrigation rights on Colorado streams be absolute-ly respected and protected, we are also mindful of the rights of those on the Missouri River below us. We agree with the Post-Dispatch that we have a
com-mOR problem. Co-operation will solve it.
Denver.
JOHN C. VIVIAN,
Miles City, Montana, Sunday, May 14,
1944
I
WE FOUND A FRIEND IN MISSOURIIt seems that our editorial of April
9, anent the Missouri river s~t~ation,
wherein we voiced our oPposltIOn to the taking of the stream flow out of upper basin states, to float bar.ges for
the industrialists in the st. Loms area,
had far-reaching effects. We have already been apprized of its reproduc-tion in the Congressional Record and
of the' dismay caused the Army
En-gineers thereby. We -also know that it caused the editorial writer of the
st. LouiS Post-Dispatch (who had
written in a mistaken and critical
vein, of the irrigationists of the upper
states) to about face and take an
entirely new slant on the matter of conserving water for irrigation.
Now comes a letter from the presi-dent of the Osage River Flood
Con-trol Association, of Linn, Missouri,
wherein he disclaims any connection with the water pirates, whom we re-ferred to as "t.he Jesse James Boys." From Mr. Dessieux's letter (the said
president) it seems that the down
river industrialists are as unholy an alliance to the Osage River people as they are to us. But we will let Mr. Dessieux tell his own story in the following letter:
Gentlemen:
I read with much interest and
mingled reelings your editorial of
April 9, 1944. Under the caption of
"The Jesse James boys ride yet-not again."
I wish to inform your good
peo-ple of Montana, that the flood con-trol people along the lower Missouri River are their friends and fellow sufferers from the so-called naviga-tion intet'ests. We havp. been taking the beating for years of which you now complain, only in a different manner.
We may be descendants of the James Boys, but have no desire to steal something we do not want.
If we ever start any legal action
against Montana or any other
up-river state it will be to enjoin .them
from sending their flood waters
down on us. This is the fourth
IStra*ght year that we on the lower MiS!!OUri River have lost everything, from floods. We have never sold a
c.rop at war prices, but have had
our income cut off for four years, and at the same time had to pay
advanced prices for labor,
ma-chinery, food and clothing. We can-not continue to take that kind of a beating. The last thing we want is
more water. The only thing we
want from the up-river state~ is for
them to keep their water and give
us their friendship and
co-opera-,
-tion in fighting our common enemy, and prompQn6' our mutual interest. We do not like the nine foot
chan-nel bill any better t'han .. you do.
.Standing alone as at present it
means more and larger floods for us.
Neither do we want to be drawn
into a fight with ihe up-river
states, that will only benefit o~r
enemies. They already have their nine foot channel bill passed.
We agree with you that the Mis..; souri must be controlled for the
benefit of the whole area. We
be-lieve the only way this can be done is to make flood control and irriga-tion the primary benefits.
Irrigation, flood control, levees,
soil erosion, reforestration, contour farming, farm ponds, all work
to-gether for the benefit of all. It
takes all to make the complete
whole. The only fly in the ointment is navigation. The more navigation
p'rojects we have the less irrigation
and flood control is possible. Yet untold millions of taxpayers money has been spent to get navigation on the :\Iissouri River. About all the increase in navigation we have is the rescue boats in time of floods. Add to the millions of dollars we have spent for navigation, the dam-ages caused by increased floods, the detriment to irrigation, and it would be cheaper to ship all freight on the Missouri River, by first cll\sS
postage, at the new increased
postal rates. Yet all this money is spent and «<images done, in the name of cheap transportation. Who
gets the bargain? It seems to me
that it is a game where everybody gets socked. What fools we mortals be.
Where are the representatives we sent to Congress to represent us? We will soon be choosing
repre-sentatives again. If we fail to
choose those who will represent our interests, then the trouble does not lie in some other state or county,
but on our own door step. .
We are for a full development of the Missouri River Basin in any
manner that will -be of the most
benefit to the most people, and are willing to concede all legitimate rights of others to g'ain this end. To quibble over nOll-essentials is to lose. The job must be done now. The work mnst be ready to start the moment the war ends.
Sincerely yours, Paul B. Dessieux, President, Osage River Flood Control Ass'n., Linn, Missouri
TO
FROM National
Reclamation
Association
National Press Building
Washington, D. C.
MILES CITY DAILY STAR Miles City, Montana, Monoay, May 1, 1944
, FLOODS Ar-.."1) IRRIGATION
The editor of the st. Louis (Mis-souri) Post-Dispatch, discussing tll"
subject of floods and irrigation in
the Mississippi-Missouri river basin, says thue is a workable solution of the problrms arising between and among thr several i.nterc:,;" seeking practical uses of the watE;!l.
That solution lies in the (;reation of an agency of government which will be equally responsible for irriga-tion, flood control and navigation.
It should be created, the Post-Dis-patch says. Such an agency does not now exist.
What is rJl'eded, tbi>; newspaper de-clares, i!':
a
Federal derdopment cor-porath.l.TlW.i thought is contained hl the following comment made ediLo"811y hy the editor of the Post-Dispatch:
"The floods which ha ve desc~ndeQ
again upon the Missouri and Missis-sippi valleys are an object lesson in the fundamental fact that we of the lower Missouri shall never have the flood control works we so desperately need until we have enlisted the co-operation of the states· toward the headwaters of the river.
"The co-operation of the plains states can never be att~ined until we of the lower valley become as sym-pathetic to their needs for irrigation
as
we expect them to be to our needs for flood control."To our neighbors of the upper val-ley, the flood is an object lesson, too. The turbulent waters that are today our bane are waters that might to them have been a blessing-but they will never irrigate :" foot of land; their Usefulness is lost forever.
"In order for the upper and lower Bections of the Missouri valley to work together as they must, there must be
a
plan unselfish and ~far-seeingenough for all the valley states to realize an advantage in entering into it.
"J?Uring the months when the army engmeers were speaking for their Missouri river development plan, call-ing it comprehensive, we said the irri-gation states could best serve their own interests by dropping selfish sec-tional claims and helping to fill in the broad outlines of the plan. We argued that irrigation could thus be realized as well as flood control navi-gation, power production and ~ll the
other benefits of a river control sys-tem of engineering works ..
"In the two -months during which the army engineers' plan has been speaking for itself, it has shown it-self to be not comprehensive, and, in the context of other recommendations of the army engineers, to be actually prejUdicial to the irrigation interests of Montana, Wyoming, the Dakotas,
Nebraska and Kansas.
"Obyiously the irrigation states can-not. be expected to support a plan which merely says in a general way that irrigation is a good thing. which leaves a vacant spot to be filled by an irrigation plan, and which oper-ates-in conjunction with other pro-posals-to establish water priorities for navigation and against irrigation. Yet that is what the army engineers'
plan does.
"The irriga tion sta tes' response to grab tactics with grab tactics-as in their unsuccessful effort to reserve the flow of the upper river for irriga-tion purposes - is unders.tandable. They were fighting water with water. But all that is to, be gained by self-ish grasping' tactics on either side in .obstructionism of the whole val-ley's proper development.
"The root of the trouble is that planning for the Missouri river is
done by several government agencies which are required by acts of con-gress to press their special interests and to desist from working upon others. The army engineers, who have flood control and navigation as their special province. are prohibited by statute from planning for irriga-tion, while the opposite is true of the bureau of reclamation.
"The only really workable solution
is the entrustment of the work of planning-and later of construction and operation-to an agency of gov-ernment which will be equally respon-sible for irrigation. flood control and navigation, and which all the states of the Missouri valley can rely upon to look after all their interests.
"Such an agency does not now ex-ist. It should be created. A federal development corporation is wanted, and until it is brought into existence no planning for the valley's future will be much more than the carrying on of an obstructionist dispute or the making' of a makeshift compromise."
May 1, 1944
ST. LOUIS POST,DISPATCH,
This Unsafe Valley
The Tennessee River throughout its Zength is controlZed. This vaHey has been made
sa/e.-David E. Lilienthal, chairman of the Tennessee Valley Authority, in "TVA-De-mocracy on the March."
The Missouri River is uncontrolled. This valley has not been made safe. Between the Great Lakes and Oklahoma, between the Great Divide and Canada, the people live in fear: to the north, of the drouth that stays always on the land; to the south, of flood.
Today, one million of the Missouri Valley'. acres lie under the Wildly, uncontrolled flood wa-ters of the river in the- states of Missouri and Illinois. Six thousand persons have been driven from tlleir homes:- ore an a alf~ill10n
acres of crops have been destroyed.
Wheat has been lost, that was to become the grain alcohol to make the synthetic Tubber for our armies. Food has been swept away, that was to have fed us and our fighting comrades. Cattle and hogs safe after the flood's passing are still partly lost, for they will be sold unfat-tened, now that the growers lack barns and feed. In St. Louis and' St. Charles counties alone, the crop loss is estimated at $2,000,000. In the en-tire Missouri Valley, the damages of the flood of the spring of 1944 are expected to be as great as the damages of the floods of the spring of 1943, if not greater: and they were estimated at $26,000,000.
*
•
*
How long will the anger of the people burn slowly at the deadly folly which permits the Mis-souri Riier to' bring disaster' to the farms and towns and cities along its banks almost every spring-sometimes doing its worst, as it has done this season; and sometimes doing less; but al-'
most without fail bringing calamit:r year in, year out?
The way of controlling the wasted waters of a river and, having brought them under control, putting them to 'work, is described by Mr. Lilien
-=-thaI in his spirited and imagination-stirring book. After TVA, there is no longer reason for anYOlle not to know how the thing is done. As its chair-man says, "The TVA Act was the deliberate and well-considered creation of a new national pol-icy. For the first time in the history of the na-tion, the resources of a, :.:egion were not only to be 'envisioned in their entire'ty'; they were to be developed in that unity with which nature her': self reg~rds her resources."
Yet this national policy, priceless and irreplace-able as it Is to the Missouri Valley, is not only not being followed here-it is actually being fore-sworn. The Federal Government is going along in the old inefficient, .discredited way, and with-out protest from the Governors of the Missouri
Valley states or any of our Senators and Repre-sentatives in Congress.
The consequences of this supreme effort to avoid learning by experience are now being dem-onstrated in Washington. The Army Engineer.!' "Pick plan" has been embodied in the 1944 floo~
control bill, but it is so deficient in respect to irrigation that the President and the Bureau of the Budget have requested that action on it be held up until the Reclamation Bureau can com-plete its -, five-year study and irrigation can be
-maae a part of the plan.
However, navigation interests-principally the
J
Mississippi Valley Association-are not ,disI>o,sedto wait, and they are pressing for congressional approva1
t
"the Ptck --plan, though the RErclama--tion Bureau report has not
. ..
Yetbee;Tssu~'
Moreovert ,the navigation interests are seeking
to have enacted in the rivers and harbors bill a provision which would legally reserve to naviga-tion virtually the entire flow of the ~issouri.
In retaliation, the Great Plains states, to which irrigation is life itself, are attempting to obtain enactment of a proviso which would reserve to irrigation all the flow of the Missouri which originates within their boundaries.
This fratricidal struggle will be joined Thurs-day and FriThurs-day of next week when hearings are held on the rivers and harbors bill. A rv-Ie-or-ruin attitude is indicated for the nayigation in-terests by the asser~i().!l of Lachlan Macleay, pres-ident of the .
.¥.
Y..!.~~,1.~hat irrigation interests are sabotaging flood control and that the Pick plan should be approved by Congress whether the reclamatipn report is ready or not.Mr. Macleay seems to be speaking of-flood' con-trol, but actually he is speaking of navigation. Tlll:lre is no contest between the Great Plains and the -lower river on the subject of flood control. Our neighbors to the north realize we need it
~nd . they want us to have it, but the,L are not willing to let it be done as pa:!'t
