| OCR Text |
Show 68 schedules. In this way, only the individual who failed to meet the repayment schedule would be in danger of losing water and/ or land. 44 Through this partnership, state officials were able to eliminate the state's financial risk associated with water development, while at the same time retaining some control over the pattern of development. The state's commitment did not extend beyond the normal operating budgets of the state's water management officials. Further, there was no commitment on the state's part to guarantee repayments, fund structural repairs, or provide for the operating expenses of projects. The state's water management officials' specific roles relating to the Strawberry Project were: ( 1) Through the Arid Land Reclamation Fund Commission ( and later the Utah State Conservation Commission) it coordinated the many different interests involved in the project. ( 2) Through the Office of the State Engineer it certified that sufficient water rights were available to enable the project to succeed. ( 3) It influenced and monitored development as the State Engineer participated in the design process. ( 4) It utilized institutional organizations to help the water users organize into an acceptable repayment associations. The state also played something of a support role for the federal government in water development undertaken by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. This agency was engaged in building irrigation structures on the Uintah Indian Reservation from 1902 through 1917. Total federal investment in these efforts was $ 915,000.45 The majority of this construction money was paid to Anglo- American farmers, who were themselves attempting to establish irrigated agriculture in the area. Uintah Basin farmers were able to fund much of their own irrigation development by working for the Indian bureau. Since white settlement on the reservation had not been allowed until late 1905, most farmers were in the first few years of their settlement operations and made a very willing work force for the Indian bureau. In addition to this monetary help, settlers were also able to partially utilize the reservation's Indian irrigation canals for their own fields. Many of the canals and water rights eventually functioned under the settlers' control rather than with the Indians. 46 Since the projects were on an Indian reservation and involved federal dollars, state water development officials had less input into the design and planning of Uintah projects than they had with other federal projects in the state. However, because congress instructed the Bureau of Indian Affairs to follow state law in water matters, the Office of the State Engineer did control the process by which water right applications were recorded in the area during and following the "" The Reclamation Service originally wanted to hold tide for all die water rights served by die project until it was paid for, however die contract was modified so tiiat each water user was individually liable. The contract is reprinted in United States Reclamation Service, Fourth Annual Report of the Reclamation Service, 1904- 1905 ( Washington D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1906), pp 333- 334. 4 Craig W. Fuller, et aL Beyond the Wasatch: The History of Irrigation in the Uinta Basin and Upper Provo River Area, Editor Gregory D. Kendrick. Introduction Charles S. Peterson. ( National Park Service Regional Office in Denver, 1989), Chapter 2. 46Ibid., See Chapters 1 and 2 for a general description of die policies, and p 30. Clearly, Mormon farmers benefited most from die irrigation system designed and built to promote agricultural self- sufficiency within die Uintah Indian Reservation. The Utes, on die otiier hand, became die unwilling financiers of an expensive irrigation system which few Indians wanted or ultimately used. . . . Rarely has a major federal irrigation, however, been so quickly deflected from its original intent |
