A New State of Water
The land frauds and the landgrabs compose the
shabbiest chapter in our history. We have 75
years now of conservation as a (federal)
government policy, of husbanding, developing,
and using the publically owned natural resources
for the public benefit. So we have grown used to
believing that such corruption, such raids on the
treasury, such blind imbecility were ended for
all time.
But at this moment some powerful interests are
preaching that what was intolerable corruption
on a scale of half a million acres becomes wise
public policy if you up the scale to half a billion
acres. They are calling on Congress to legalize a
final, conclusive raid on the publicly owned
resources of the United States.
1953, Bernard DeVoto on the public lands
450 miles long
40-70 miles wide
Little precipitation and bad timing
Extremely fertile
Water in wrong places
Serious floods
Saltwater intrusion
State supervision
of irrigation
districts
Flood control
Valley wide plan
Decreasing ground
water
Army Corps of Engineers
primarily flood control and navigation
levees and redirection
Bureau of Reclamation
primarily irrigation
dams and canal systems
Compete over budgets and political power
Not particularly successful
Property –weighted voting
monopoly power
Water storage districts
Kern County
125,000/250,000 votes!
Local control failure to reach goals
Dam on the Sacramento River
Aqueducts to both sides of Valley
Water to Bay Area
Improved navigation
Prevent saltwater intrusion
Water to LA area
Electricity production
Progressive movement losing influence
Private Power
SCE and PG&E
North worried about shipping water south
Existing water rights holders
Riparian supersedes appropriative
1928 vote “reasonable beneficial use.”
County of origin law
Depression – repudiate Republicans
FDR= government intervention
Republicans had to switch ideas
The pendulum
Increased pressure to build
something
JOBS
Need for Federal financing
Pubic or private power
“No public power, no federal
help”
July 1933, bill passed the state
Private power lobbying
LA against
North in favor
Valley in favor
Federal takeover by Bureau
* 20 dams
* 500 miles of canals
* 9 MAF
* 2.5 municipal consumers
* 3 million acres
* Environmental benefits
* 5.6 MkWH
* 2 million customers
* $34 million revenues
160 acres
Excess sold within 10 years
Excess sold at prices reflecting prior to water
No interest on capital funding
Costs reduced by electricity revenues
6% of owners held 53% of land!
Many large farms predated the CVP
“unearned increment” from CVP
Dinuba study
small farms = equality, higher living
standards, schools and parks, and businesses
study buried
Post war philosophy
Increase Bureau’s budget
Post war technology (not in book)
160 acres per shareholder or family member or
employee
Accelerated payoff
Ignore residency requirement
Ignore “unearned increment”
Jefferson Vs Hamilton
Should the Gov’t aid, support, subsidize or
ignore private business?
Large business or small business?
Labor relations?
GDP or singing and dancing?
Recall: Hoover Dam: LADWP and SCE
Recall Hetch Hetchy: Municipal sold to PG&E
Farmers want what?
Power to be delivered in the North
Large farms in the south
Small farms in the North
What is the conflict?
Power to the Bureau
Used for Bureau pumps
Excess sold to PG&E
PG&E sells back to gov’t
PG&E sells to customers
Customers subsidize PG&E (monopoly) and
agribusiness
Electricity users (northern cities, SF, and small
farms) were providing $300,000,000 in subsidies
to the (large) Central Valley Farms!
Southern cities, LA, did not need the power