California Scheming
Los Angeles' insatiable thirst for water, which drained the Owens Valley, has ruined lives, shaped the city's politics and provoked ongoing controversy
- By Mark Wheeler
- Smithsonian magazine, October 2002, Subscribe
(Page 5 of 12)
Mulholland began looking throughout Southern California for an alternative supply of freshwater, but it was Fred Eaton who came up with a solution. On a camping trip to the Sierra in the early 1890s, Eaton had gazed down upon OwensLake and thought about all the freshwater flowing into it and going to waste. Yes, Los Angeles was some 200 miles away, but it was all downhill. All one would have to do to move it to the city was dig some canals, lay some pipe and let gravity do the rest. Furthermore, he realized, several streams flowing out of the Sierra could be used to generate hydroelectric power. Imagine, a 200-plus-mile aqueduct running downhill to L.A. and “free” power to boot! Over the next two decades, as his civic interest joined his personal financial interests, Eaton grew increasingly evangelical about OwensValley water.
In September 1904, he took Mulholland to OwensValley with only “a mule team, a buckboard, and a demijohn of whiskey,” Mulholland later recalled. Despite the hooch, it was the water and not the whiskey that made a believer out of Mulholland. He readily endorsed Eaton’s proposal to build an aqueduct. Eaton, meanwhile, was buying water options from OwensValley ranchers and farmers whose pastures bordered the river, without disclosing the city’s plan. He also purchased a 23,000-acre cattle ranch in LongValley, most of which he hoped to sell to the city, at a tidy profit, for use as an aqueduct reservoir.
Historians differ on Eaton’s motives. Some say he duped OwensValley residents. Others say his purchases, though cunning, were justifiable because they benefited the city, which lacked the money to buy the land until voters later approved a $1.5 million bond measure. To his dying day, Eaton denied charges that he acted duplicitously.
Grandson John Eaton, who until a year ago lived on one of the last acres of land in LongValley passed down from his father, Harold Eaton, believes that his grandfather had no need to double-deal. “People were seeking him out to sell their property,” he says. “They saw him as this crazy millionaire who wanted to become a cattle baron and who was foolishly overpaying for land. And they wanted to get out.” It was a hardscrabble life, what with the valley’s short growing season, and the playing out of local gold and silver mines, the market for its produce. Of course, had the sellers known the buyer in the shadows was the city of Los Angeles, they wouldn’t have sold their land so cheaply, if at all.
Single Page « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next »
Subscribe now for more of Smithsonian's coverage on history, science and nature.









Comments (2)
I don't think they should run water to LA through the aquaducts. I think the people of LA should take new measures of saving water to where the water supply wouldn't be so low. The water they are trying to obtain is valuable agricultural water. The crops grown with this water wouldn't grow without it so it is vital they have the water. We also shouldn't remove the water because it has many negative affects on the ecosystem. It causes lakes to dry up causing many species to die. It also leaves a salty residue causing pollution and opening the ecosystems up for new invasive species. Overall, i think the negative affects are worse than the positive affects. I don't think they should continue to run water to LA.
Posted by Brandon Abernathy on March 24,2009 | 11:22 PM
The Wattersons Are my family and this town and valley.. Bishop is my home. I support the brothers efforts to the end!
Posted by Jamie Jarvis on February 15,2009 | 06:36 PM