| OCR Text |
Show value of the land after it has been irrigated. Thus, while the cost of existing irrigation proj- ects in the Columbia Basin averages only $65 per acre, the costs of projects now under construction will average just under $350 and the correspond- ing cost per acre of potential projects is estimated at $450. These costs are increasingly beyond the re- payment abilities of prospective users of irrigated lands, even if some additional repayment is sought through conservancy districts embracing commercial communities which will gain indi- rectly from the projects. The question naturally arises as to whether there is any reasonable limit to the extent of Federal investment. Stated dif- ferently, the question is whether projects involv- ing relatively high Federal investment per acre should be approved. A review of irrigation projects, as already pointed out, shows that, in return for large in- vestments by the Federal Government, such proj- ects have provided large benefits in addition to those accruing to irrigation farmers. These benefits have flowed to business interests in the locality, to transportation agencies, and to the national commercial and consumer economy. In a real sense these projects have extended the strong economy of the Nation into arid States which would otherwise have made a far smaller contribution to the life of the American people. Irrigation projects contribute to the Nation's ample supplies of foods and fibers, and particu- larly to its relatively high and varied dietary standards. Investment in such projects is an investment in land productivity to supply the increasing urban population; it is an investment in the Nation's future. This is essentially a public rather than a private responsibility. Furthermore, the reclamation program is in many ways an extension of the Federal home- steady policy of the earlier period of the country's development. It offers the opportunity for more farm homes. Active supporters of the pro- gram are largely business interests which will gain from regional development, some local, but many, like tlie railroads, representing national rather than local or regional interests. In connection with any proposed reclamation project, consideration should, of course, be given to the need for the project as part of a carefully worked out program for meeting the Nation's requirements for foods, fats, and fibers.- Con- sideration should also be given to the importance of the project in terms of the growth of the econ- omy of the region in which it would be located, including such considerations as (a) the increased population and business activity which it would directly or indirectly sustain; (b) the stabilizing effect which it would have on the regional agri- cultural economy; (c) its contribution to the re- gional supply of agricultural products to meet the needs of an expanding population; and (d) the prospective increases in State and Federal taxes for which it would be responsible. After the project has been found to be desira- ble because it occupies a priority position, taking all things into account, in the agricultural pro- gram for meeting the country's expanding need for foods and fibers; or because it fits in with the requirements of regional growth; or because it will help to stabilize regional agriculture or assist in range management; or because it is a part of an essential step in a river basin program, then consideration should be given to: 1. The unit cost of producing the agricultural products for which the project is adapted, if the full costs of the irrigation project are charged. 2. How much farm prices would have to rise to make irrigated farms profitable, and what the cost to the country would be of such a price rise. 3. The portion of the cost that can reasonably be collected from the prospective farmers in terms of their ability to pay at current price levels, or from secondary beneficiaries through some form of assessment procedure. The reasonable contribution of the Federal Government might then be measured in terms of the proportion of the cost of the project which local interests cannot assume at current price levels. Orthodox economists will probably hold that such projects should not be undertaken until a growing scarcity of necessary agricultural prod- ucts in the face of expanding national require- 172 |
