OCR Text |
Show dertaken for sediment and erosion control, and the place of manufacturing industry in the development of the basin resources and its effect upon and need for water development. (4) Firm integration of runoff and water flow retardation measures with flood control work, prop- erly coordinated to fit the needs and desires of the area and implemented by appropriations balanced to fit development to the needs. (5) Proper coordination of the incentive and price support programs for agriculture with land management measures to encourage over-all devel- opment in accordance with the needs of the area and the Nation. (6) The establishment of a river basin commis- sion, as suggested by this Commission (volume 1 of this report) can be particularly helpful in bringing about integration of Federal, State, and local activ- ities in programs of the size and complexity of those going forward in the basin. Establishment of such a commission may be considered an essential first step toward efficient further progress in Missouri water resources improvement. 3. Program Procedures-Irrigation Contract Principles The Problem What principles should apply in negotiating irrigation repayment contracts? The Situation Assessment of payments against irrigation water users is based upon the ability of the irrigators to pay, as determined by the net farm income result- ing from irrigation. Proper evaluation is neces- sary for estimates of ability to pay. Such estimates require assumptions as to probable future agricul- tural prices, an appropriate level of farm manage- ment, reasonable future cropping patterns, and a representative sample of sizes of farm units. Each of these variables can markedly affect estimates of ability to pay. Such stu.dies are made by farm budget analysis of future conditions with and without irrigation. These are biased upon average 1939-44 agricultural prices, a median level of farm management, and anticipated, cropping patterns which take into ac- count suchi factors as climate, soils, local and regional ne«ds, and nearness to markets. Current estimates of ability to pay for all po- tential irrigation units in the basin indicate that a total of 32 million dollars annually may be expected. Annual irrigation operation and maintenance costs are estimated to exceed 12 million dollars, which, deducted from total payment capacity, would leave about 20 million dollars annually available to amortize construction costs. These estimates are based upon irrigation divisions and units represent- ing over 5 million acres of new lands and about 880,000 acres of presently irrigated lands that would receive a supplemental water supply. If 1939-44 prices prevail in the long-run future, however, this amount probably could not be contracted in full. Experience has shown that repayment contracts usually are negotiated at amounts less than full payment capacity. In the case of Indian lands special consideration is required. Within the basin there are 27 Indian reservations with an aggregate area of about 13 mil- lion acres of land owned by Indians. Several Federal irrigation projects have been constructed and operated on these lands. These have an ulti- mate irrigated area of approximately 380,000 acres of mixed ownership. On the Indian-owned lands Federal laws apply, while State laws are applicable to non-Indian lands. On the non-Indian lands, the law generally re- quires payment of irrigation construction charges. By contrast, nonreimbursable Federal funds tradi- tionally have been used for irrigation development on Indian lands. Annual operation and mainte- nance charges are assessed against both Indian and non-Indian irrigators. Reclamation policy provides for several types of contracts with water users. In general, the con- tracts are drawn up under the most recent legisla- tion, and existing contracts are revised to take ad- vantage of the more liberal provisions of legisla- tion passed after their negotiation. It is difficult, therefore, to do more than classify the main types roughly, pointing out that the contracts actually in force in the basin may vary widely in detail. The first type is the fixed payment plan, which provides for a 40-year period during which the water users as a group contract to repay a fixed amount of Federal construction costs, in specified annual installments. Such a contract is in effect on the Colorado-Big Thompson project. Here the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District has contracted to pay one-half of the construction cost of the project, not to exceed 25 million dollars, in 40 consecutive annual installments after comple- tion of construction. Other types of payment plans are provided under 248 |