OCR Text |
Show -45- figure as possible, and gradually increased as the development of the country warrants. That the annual rental should be placed at a figure that will pay the cost of maintenance and a reasonable rate of interest on the capital invested, and should never be changed. The lower the rental, the higher you can eventually charge for lands and water rights, and the less danger will there be of conflict with the irrigators and of legislative attempts to lower the rates. Maintenance ^ think the cost of maintenance of the system will be in the neighborhood of $150,000 per year. Figuring on a water rental of $1.25 per acre, the total revenue from this source on 400,000 acs. will be $500,000, which will pay the cost of maintenance and 10% on the estimated cost of the canals and still leave a possible surplus of $137,943 per annum. In California, water rentals vary between $1 and $20 per acre per annum; water rights, between $8 and $200 per acre, and bare land with water rights from $50 to $500 per acre. According to the U.S. Census Report, the average selling price of water rights in California in 1890 was nearly $40 per acre, and of irrigated lands $150 per acre. Judging from my knowledge of the products of irrigated lands in Southern California and on the Colorado River bottom lands, I think I am sufficiently conservative in making this statement, that at the present time, with an annual rental of $1.25 per acre, a Salton Basin farm, well |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : California exhibits. |