Report by Mr. A.M. Ashmore, receiver-general, Cyprus, on Mr. Medlicott's irrigation scheme.Author(s): Ashmore, Alexander MurraySource: Foreign and Commonwealth Office Collection, (1896)Published by: The University of Manchester, The John Rylands University LibraryStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/60230194 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 22:41

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Digitization of this work funded by the JISC Digitisation Programme.

The University of Manchester, The John Rylands University Library and are collaborating with JSTOR todigitize, preserve and extend access to Foreign and Commonwealth Office Collection.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Report by Mk. A. M. AsifMouE, Receiver-General,

^ Cyprus, on Mr. Medlicott's Irrigation Scheme.

Nicosia, Cyprus, llth June, 1896.

Sih, 1. The instructions conveyed to me in Mr. Chamberlain's despatch

of the 16th December, 1895, are substantially as follows—to report: i. Whether, if the Government of Cyprus undertake the construction

of principal irrigation works, it would also find it necessary to under¬ take to provide the subsidiary distributing channels.

ii. Whether, as a necessary preliminary to the expenditure of money on the construction of a system of works, it would be possible or desirable to secure the surrender of existing rights in water.

iii. Whether a sum of £300,000 could be expended in Cyprus in creating a system of irrigation with " Commercial" advantage.

2. For the purpose of decision in regard to the last question, certain conditions of account are laid down in the 10th paragraph of the

despatch. 3. I have now the advantage of having before me Mr. Medlicott's

report on his mission, in which he has set out at length the engineering- aspects of the case.

4. Mr. Medlicott, probably from inadvertence, has not specially referred to the first point; it seems only necessary with regard to it to state that the portion of the peasant population which has the advantage of the use of the existing very limited supply of water available for

irrigation purposes provides its own subsidiary channels, and that, if additional main channels of supply were provided by engineering science, there is no apparent reason why difficulty should arise with regard to the provision of distributing works either by the labour or at the

expense of those who are to benefit. 5. The second subject of reference, the very troublesome question of

private rights in water, is very clearly treated in a memorandum by the

Acting Queen's Advocate, Mr. Lascelles, attached to Mr. Medlicott's

report. Particular's of a great number of private rights in and claims to the waters of streams, &c, are in the possession of Government. It is not possible to entertain any doubt that the extinction of a great body of private rights in and to the water of streams and rivers, which it may be necessary to deal with for the purpose of scoring their surplus water, is an essential preliminary condition to any action on other than a very small scale. This point must therefore first be made a subject of legislation.

tt^i.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

2

6. The third question is far less easy of decision. It is the peculiarity of schemes of irrigation that they arouse in the minds of those who

originate them, and, of those to whom they are suggested and who interest themselves in forwarding them, very sanguine expectations of

profit and success. I have endeavoured, as far as in me lies, to guard against this source of danger in calculating the probability of commercial

advantage, but the absence of trustworthy statistical information 0:1 all the sobjects (except only the prices of produce) vhich enter into the consideration of the point at issue makes it impossible to say «ith cer¬

tainty that in this respect success has been obtained.

7. Mr. Medlicott has calculated the cost at which he can supply a

sufficiency of water to the area of land estimated by him to be irrigable at £2 15s. per acre. This sum is the initial point from which all my calculations start.

8. He has calculated the irrigable area, the meaning of which he

defines, to be 245 square miles, and he explains that 55 square miles are already irrigated, leaving 190 for which he has to provide water. But I am not clear whether his £2 15s. includes the cost of providing " compensatory

" water for the already irrigated lands. Clearly if the

existing sources of supply to already irrigated lands are to be interfered

with, those lauds will have to continue to be supplied at the Government

expense with " compensatory "

water, and it will be fair to assume that their irrigation will cost as much—(it may be less but will not be more, as certain works for their benefit are now in existence and need not be

supplied again)—as that of new lands.

9. If his plan provides for the cost of compensating already irrigated lands within the limit of £2 15s. per acre of the new lands, then £2 15s.

multiplied by 190 multiplied by 640 will be the coat of all works ; but, if not, 245 must be substituted for 190. In the former case, the total

expenditure will be £334,400; in the latter, £431,200; and the sums

annually to be provided will be £11,704 or £15,092, as the case may be.

10. It will, it is hoped, not be thought improper to assume one or the other of these sums as the amount which it will be necessary to have covered by sufficient returns, instead of working to a limit of £300,000. This last quoted figure was necessarily fixed in the absence of informa¬ tion as to the actual work to be done and its estimated cost, and to adhere to it would call for a continuous readjustment of figures through¬ out the two reports.

11. It will of course be clear that if, for reasons not now present to

me, it is necessary to limit expenditure to that or any other sum, less than the full estimated cost, the prospect of commercial advantage is pro tanto proportionately improved, because the separate works must

/

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

3

necessarily vary in their probable amount of returns, and the less profit¬ able can be omitted.

12. The sources of possible direct advantage to the revenue of Cyprus from works of irrigation are four :

i. Water rate. h. Increased tithe. iii. Increased land tax. iv. Payments for water for other purposes than the irrigation of land.

13. Of these sources, the water rate is by far the most important, and it is on this account that, changing the order adopted in the despatch, I propose to deal with it first.

14. The fir.it question that falls to be decided is, what water rate per acre can probably be charged

15. In summer no cultivation of any kind is practicable in Cyprus without a permanent supply of water ; but in winter the ordinary rain¬ fall supplies a quantity which is sometimes sufficient of itself and some¬ times only requires to be slightly supplemented. At times, of course, the

crops would be greatly benefited by its being largely added to.

16. Summer cultivation again is more profitable than winter, the latter consisting, in the main, of cereals, the former of cotton, aniseed, sesame and generally of crops which yield batter prices. Though again, against this has to be set that summer crops require a better soil.

17. It follows that, though summer water will yield a greater and winter water a less proportional return, water rates must be, iu the main, based on the probability of advantage to the cereal crops. It is impor¬ tant to note this, because it negatives the possibility of charging such rates generally as are frequently exacted by owners of water in special cases.

18. Mr. Medlicott has quoted—in relation to the question of rates— the instance of the famous Kyfchrea water, where the summer irrigation of a little more than 600 acres costs, or rather is calculated to be worth, upwards of .£800. It is to be observed at once that iii this case the winter water, which is far greater in volume than the summer supply, is not charged for. Evidence, however, which I have collected from numerous sources, makes it clear that very high prices are as a rule charged for water by private proprietors, both in summer and in winter.

19. After giving to all the cases I have found the best consideration that I am able, and after consulting such persons as I thought likely to be able to form a sound opinion, and taking into account that, for many reasons, the Government cannot rack-rent its cultivators, I have fixed 6s. per acre as the minimum rate which may be charged both for

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

i

summer and winter water. I cannot separate the two, though for some reasons it would be preferable to do so. I am informed that cultivators would be extremely unwilling to take water otherwise than continuously.

20. I think there should be no difficulty in levying this moderate charge, and I may state that it is lower than any that has been suggested to me.

21. The next point is over what area this rate may annually be levied. Mr. Medlicott reports the area irrigable in the four " basins "

into which he divides the Island, as follows :

Square miles.

/

Basin. Extent irrigable.

Already irrigated.

To be supplied with water.

Southern 50 10 40

Northern 15 — 15

Western SO 20 60

Eastern... 100 25 75

190

and he has allowed, with probably sufficient liberality, for fallow: although, in doing so, he has nob followed the usual country rule of half-and-half, but has set aside only 25,60ths. He appears to have

anticipated that the provision of water would place one-sixth in a con¬ dition to be annually cultivated, and, in dealing with the tithe later on, I shall adopt the same ratio.

22. 190 square miles is equal to 121,600 acres, an extent which at 6s. per acre would produce a return of £36,480 per annum water rate.

23. The next source of profit to be taken into account is the increase in tithe on 190 square miles of irrigated lands.

24. As already stated, it is proposed to assume that one-sixth—which

may be taken for facility of calculation at 30 square miles—is land of the first class capable, if irrigated, of being cultivated every alternate

year with Avheat or a summer crop, i.e., not liable to the biennial fallow. 25. The remaining 160 square miles will be fallow every alternate

year, but in that case the equal quantity which Mr. Meddlicott left for the purpose will take its turn of cultivation.

26. This extent of 30 square miles will then divide itself into t«o halves, one wheat, on which the increase of the tithe due to the

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

3

provision of water should be credited as a profit to the irrigation fund. V The other half summer crops, the whole tithe on which is due to the

water, because if there were no water there would be no summer crop, and the extent would lie fallow.

27. On the remaining 160 square miles the increase in tithe due to

^v the water is to be credited to the fund. 28. The probable increase of the crop per acre of wheat attributable

to a good water supply may be put at 8 bushels per acre on good land. This is certainly a low estimate. 15 square miles is 9,600 acres, and at 8 bushels the acre, the improved crop will be 76,800 bushels, the tithe 7,680 bushels, and its value at 2s. a bushel, £768.

29. The tithe on 15 square miles of summer crop is less easy to calculate. Many products might be grown and it is not of course possible to state in what proportions. But the most generally cultivated summer crops are cotton and beans. I have calculated the tithe likely to be recovered at current prices and on the usually estimated yields, and find that in the former case the Government might expect to obtain £4,200, and in the latter £3,200. The return of £3,500 per annum will be assumed.

30. The last head of account under tithes is the increase to be ex¬

pected on 160 square miles of barley. Barley is the crop most com-

^ monly grown on ordinary land. I take the increase of production at ^ 6 bushels per acre and the price at Is. a bushel, which a simple calcula¬

tion will shew to yield on 102,403 acres an improved tithe of £3,072. 31. The total improved tithe thus comes to £7,340. 32. I have purposely excluded from my figures probable returns from

tree and market garden cultivation, which, although they would form a strong inducement to the peasantry to accept and pay for water, and would yield an augmented tithe of olives, silk and other produce, do not lend themselves to any possible mode of calculation and estimate.

33. It may be proper to note here—in order to prevent a misconcep¬ tion which is not unlikely to give rise to a mistaken criticism—that the

growers of wheat, cotton, beans, barley, &c, &c, are not separate in¬ dividuals growing separate crops, but persons who, owning lands of

differing degrees of fertility, turn each parcel to its most profitable use, and who are understood to prefer to pay their water rate at a lump sum

per acre to paying different rates in summer and winter, and in propor- tion to the fertility or in accordance with the favourable situation or otherwise of their lands. If this were not so, it is obvious that no

person would pay 6s. per acre to obtain, e.g., an increased yield of six bushels of barley value Is. each bushel. Bat clearly a large number of

Wr owners taken together, as described, would be willing to contribute

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

£36,000 yearly water rate to earn by that means nine times £7,340, equal to £66,000.

34. The next source of direct profit is the additional verghi kimat which the increased value of land would bring in to revenue.

35. Yerghi kimat is a land tax calculated at the annual rate of 4 per 1,000 on the value of land.

36. It is not possible to arrive at satisfactory figures as to the value of land in Cyprus.

Those only on which reliance can be placed are the prices realised at public (i.e. forced) sales. Forced sales in Cyprus, as elsewhere, produce notably less than sales by private contract, but they at least supply statistics which are not mere guesswork, as estimates of value would be.

37. Such as have been obtained give the prices realised for irrigated and unirrigated land in Famagusta District, where only comparison on a sufficient scale is possible, at 450 c.p., and 150 c.p. per donum res¬ pectively. I have taken the lowest of the former and the highest of the latter for prudential reasons. This makes £5 for irrigated and £1 13s. per acre for unirrigated land. And I propose to take the difference (£3^) as the * measure of the increased value for purposes of taxation. This increase has to be calculated not only over the whole 190 square miles, but also over the additional 160 allowed for fallow, which in their turn will reap the benefit of water, i.e., over in all 350

square miles. 38. Calculation will shew the yield to be £2,986 a year. 39. I omit the fourth head of possible direct profit—the sale of water

for purposes other than irrigation. It is probable that this might yield a considerable sum, but no sort of estimate other than a mere guess can be made of the probable returns.

40. On the footing of the figures above arrived at, I find the debtor and creditor account to be as below set out: To interest and sinking By water rate £36,480

fund on a capital ex¬ „ tithes 7,340 penditure of £431,200| >, verghi 2,986 at 3^ per cent £15,092

Working expenses at Is. 46,806 per acre on !?50 square Deduct for remissions, miles 11,200 non-collections, &c,

Balance annual profit 15,834 10 per cent. 4,680

£42,126 £42,126

/'

* This is a very low estimate, but I do not wish to add to the length of this paper by explaining all the reasons which go to prove that fact.

•j- For obvious reasons the larger sum has been taken.

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

fi_ 41. The result shews a probable balance in favour of the construction "* of a general scheme of works. But it will not, I hope, be forgotten that

the figures put forward are of a tentative character and not sufficiently founded on proper statistical information, which in fact in Cyprus is

wholly wanting. 42. Whatever works it may be decided to construct will, of course,

be each separately the subject of careful and particular estimate, both in

respect of their cost and of their probable financial returns. No more can be claimed for this report than that, on the imperfect information at present obtained, it shews that experiments in the direction proposed may properly be initiated.

A. M. Ashmorb, Receiver-General, Cyprus.

The Hon. The Chief Secretary to Government.

IP

'»

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

mm

This content downloaded from 195.34.78.237 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 22:41:53 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions