The bureau built roughly 700 irrigation, hydroelectric, flood control and drinking water canals, levees, tunnels and impoundments, primarily in the arid West, including about 50 in Utah.
But the federal agency's responsibility doesn't go away when the ribbon is cut. The facilities, including some dating back 100 years or more, need to be inspected, maintained and repaired on a regular basis to avoid disaster.
The bureau's Safety of Dams Program, approved by Congress after the Teton Dam collapse in 1976 that claimed 11 lives in southestern Idaho, mandates routine inspections for large impoundments. But unfortunately, the inspection of smaller impoundments and man-made waterways is left to the whim of the bureau.
This winter the bureau's Truckee Canal in Nevada, one of dozens of facilities exempt from the regulations, gave way. More than 590 homes and businesses in the city of Fernley were flooded, causing tens of millions of dollars in damages. Reclamation didn't need a crystal ball to see it coming. It marked the ninth time that the century-old earthen canal had failed.
The agency's failure to be proactive has once again forced Congress to be reactive. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, has introduced the Aging Water Infrastructure and Maintenance Act, which augments the existing inspection program. The "Better Safe Than Sorry Act" would be a better description.
Reid's bill would wisely mandate annual inspections of all federally owned waterworks, require the bureau to develop a priority list for repairs and rehabilitation, and provide $11 million to put the expanded program in place. It seems like a small price to pay to safeguard lives and property, and give citizens peace of mind.
Surprisingly, the measure met with resistance from short-sighted, cost-conscious bureau officials and senators at a hearing this week.
Bureau Commissioner Robert Johnson said his agency does an "adequate" job, and the legislation is unnecessary. The Fernley flood indicates otherwise.
Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch said the mandate could divert funding from other vital bureau programs. If that's the case, he should amend the bill to add more money.
After all, it costs a lot more to clean up after dam and canal breaks - to renovate damaged homes and repair shattered lives - than it costs to prevent them.
