PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
 LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON 
 IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
 SECOND SESSION 
 
 ON 
 
 H. R. 11449 
 
 By Mr. SWING 
 
 PART 1 
 
 JUNE 15, 16, 21, 1922 
 
 WASHINGTON- 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 WO 1922
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. 
 
 MOSES P. KINKAID, Nebraska, Chairman. 
 
 NICHOLAS J. SINNOTT, Oregon. CARL HAYDEN, Arizona. 
 
 EDWARD C. LITTLE, Kansas. C. B. HUDSPETH, Texas. 
 
 ADDISON T. SMITH, Idaho. JOHN E. RAKER, California. 
 
 JOHN W. SUMMERS, Washington. HOMER L. LYON, North Carolina. 
 
 HENRY E. BARBOUR, California. WILLIAM B. BANKHEAD, Alabama. 
 
 E> O. LEATHERWOOD, Utah. 
 WILLIAM WILLIAMSON, South Dakota. 
 SAMUEL S. ARENTZ, Nevada. 
 MANUEL HERRICK, Oklahoma. 
 
 A. R. HUMPHREY, Cleric.
 
 PROTECTION AM) DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER 
 
 BASIN. 
 
 COMMITTEE ox IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS, 
 
 HOUSE or REPRESENTATIVES, 
 Thursday. June 15. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m.. Hon. Moses P. Kinkaid (chairman) 
 presiding. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. This hearing has been called for 
 the purpose of hearing those who are interested in the problems of the Imperial 
 Valley and vicinity with respect to irrigation from the Colorado River. Mr. Swing, 
 \ve will say that we have a report on the Swing bill, just received a few minutes ago 
 from Hon." Albert B. Fall. Secretary of the Interior. I am going to leave it to you 
 to outline the program this morning. Do you wish to read that report? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. My suggestion would be that the bill be printed at the beginning 
 of the hearing, followed by the printing of the report, so that members of the com- 
 mittee and the Congress may have it for convenient reference. 
 
 (The bill referred ^o. H. R. 11449, and the report of Secretary Fall thereon are here 
 printed in full, as follows:) 
 
 [H. R. 11449. Sixty-seventh Congress, second session.] 
 A BILL To provide for the protection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin. 
 
 Be it. enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America 
 in Congress assembled. That for the purpose of providing for the regulation, control, 
 and development of the Colorado River, an international, interstate, and navigable 
 stream, in accordance with a comprehensive and unified plan, conserving natural 
 resources, and aiding flood control, water supply, and power development, the United 
 States hereby reserves to itself the exclusive right to construct, provide, and control 
 dams, reservoirs, or diversion works upon the main trunk of said river below the 
 mouth of the Green River. 
 
 SEC. 2. That, for the purpose of regulating the lower Colorado River and controlling 
 the floods therein, providing storage of water for irrigation, securing the development 
 of electrical power, and providing homes for honorably discharged men and women of 
 the United States Army, Navy, and Marine Corps who served therein during the war 
 with Germany, the War with Spain, or in the suppression of the insurrection in the 
 Philippines, the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and empowered to 
 construct a dam and incidental works for the purpose of providing a reservoir at or 
 near Boulder Canyon on said river, adequate for the purposes aforesaid, and to acquire 
 by proceedings in eminent domain or otherwise all lands and rights of way necessary 
 for the said reservoir and incidental works: also to construct a main canal and appur- 
 tenant structures located entirely within the United States, connecting the Laguna 
 Dam on said river with the Imperial and Coachella Valleys, in California, together 
 with such other canals and structures as may be required for the distribution and 
 delivery of water from said reservoir and said river to lands in the United States 
 which said Secretary may find practicable of irrigation and reclamation therefrom, 
 and to acquire by proceedings in eminent domain or otherwise all rights of way neces- 
 sary for such canals and structures. No expenditures for the construction of canals 
 or appurtenant structures authorized hereunder shall be made until the lands to be 
 irrigated thereby shall have first been legally obligated to repay their proper portions, 
 as may be determined by the Secretary of the Interior, of the total costs thereof to 
 the United States in accordance with the terms of repayment prescribed in the act 
 of Congress approved June 17, 1902, entitled "An act appropriating the receipts from 
 the sale and disposal of public lands in certain States and Territories to the construc- 
 tion of irrigation works for the reclamation of arid lands, " and acts amendatory thereof 
 \ or supplementary thereto, hereinafter referred to as the reclamation law. 
 
 1 
 
 15
 
 2 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 SEC. 3. That the Secretary of the Interior is empowered to receive applications 
 for the right to use for the generation of electrical power portion" of the water di^chanred 
 from said reservoir and available for the generation of electrical power at said dam, 
 and, after full heiring of all concerned, to allocate to such applicants such portions 
 of auch power privileges as, in his judgment, may be consistent with an equitable 
 distribution thereof among the various interested States and among the various 
 interested communities in each State. The .f.d'I Secretary, in making such allocation, I 
 may give consideration to the plans of the various applicants, having regard to their N 
 relative adaptability to utilize such power privileges in the public interest, and at 
 reasonable cost to the communities served: Provided, That subject to such allocations 
 he shall give preference to applications made by political subdivisions. 
 
 SEC. 4. That the said Secretary is authorized to make leases of the power privileges 
 so allocated, limited to fifty years, on such terms and under such regulations as he 
 may prescribe, and to fix what he may find to be a reasonable compensation therefor. 
 Upon or after the expiration of any such lease, or renewal thereof, the United States 
 may take over the property of the lessee which is dependent for its usefulness upon 
 the continuation of the lease, and if it shall do so shall pay to the lessee its net invest- 
 ment in the property taken, not exceeding the fair value thereof at the time it is so 
 taken, with reasonable severance damages to property of the lessee not taken. Such 
 net investment, or fair value and damages, if not agreed upon, shall be fixed by a 
 proceeding in equity in the district court of the United States in the district in which 
 such property, or some part thereof, is situated. If the United States does not exer- 
 cise its right to take over such property, the Secretary of the Interior may, by agree- 
 ment with the lessee, renew the said lease for not more than fifty years, or in his 
 discretion may make a lease under the terms hereof to a new lessee, upon the condition 
 that such new lessee shall pay to the former lessee such net investment and damages 
 determined as aforesaid. If such property is not taken over by the United States, 
 or such new lessee, or such lease renewed, the said Secretary shall extend such lease 
 from year to year until such property is so taken over or such lease renewed. 
 
 SEC. 5. That any such political subdivision, instead of entering into a lease, may, 
 with the consent of the Secretary of the Interior, as the consideration for such power 
 privileges as may be allocated to it as above provided, pay to the United States in 
 annual installments, during such period not exceeding twenty-five years as may be 
 agreed upon, a total sum which shall bear the same proportion to the cost of construct- 
 ing such dam and incidental works and acquiring lands and right? of way for said 
 reservoir and incidental works, as the water allocated to such political subdivision 
 bears to all the water available for the generation of power at said dam, together with 
 a like proportion of the annual expense of operating and maintaining such dam and 
 incidental works and interest at the rate of 5 per centum per annum on the unpaid 
 portion of such proportionate part of such cost. Any or all of the installments of such 
 proportionate part of such cost may be paid in advance. The right to use for the 
 generation of electrical power the water so allocated, shall continue after the comple- 
 tion of the payment of such proportionate part of such cost, so long as such political 
 subdivision shall pay annually such proportionate part of such expense of operating 
 and maintaining such dam and incidental works. The said Secretary is authorized 
 on such terms and under such regulations as he may prescribe to make any contracts 
 which may be necessary to carry into effect the provisions of this section. The title 
 to said dam and incidental Avorks and reservoir site shall forever remain in the United 
 States. Until the completion of said dam and incidental works the Secretary of the 
 Interior is authorized to use any money received under this and the preceding section 
 for the construction of said dam and incidental works. 
 
 SEC. 6. That the right to develop power from the water in any canal constructed 
 under this act, at points along such canal, shall belong to the districts, communities, 
 and lands which contribute to the construction costs of such canal and appurtenant 
 structures, in proportion to their contributions: Proridfd, That so long as any money 
 is owing to the United States on account of the construction of said canals and appur- 
 tenant structures, the Secretary of the Interior shall control the disposition of said 
 rights to develop power and the net proceeds from any power development in said 
 canals shall be applied upon such construction charges and covered into the Treasury 
 of the United States, and credited to the various districts, communities, and lands in 
 accordance with their interests in said canals. 
 
 SEC. 7. That no part of the cost of the construction of said dam or incidental works, 
 or the acquisition of lands or rights of way for said reservoir, or incidental works. 
 shall be charged against any lands to be irrigated therefrom, but the total cost of all /- 
 irrigation canals and appurtenant structures which may be constructed hereunder 
 shall be charged equitably against such lands, in accordance with the benefits they 
 derive therefrom as mav be determined bv the Secretarv of the Interior.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 3 
 
 SEC. 8. That the dam and reservoir provided for by section 2 of this act shall be 
 used, first, for river regulation and flood control; second, for irrigation; and third, 
 for power. 
 
 SEC. 9. That nothing contained in this act shall be construed as limiting, diminish- 
 ing, or in any manner interfering with any vested rights of the States above said 
 reservoir, or of the citizens of said States, to the use, within the Colorado Eiver water- 
 l shed, of the waters of said Colorado River. 
 
 SEC. 10. That all lands of the United States found by the Secretary of the Interior 
 to be practicable of irrigation and reclamation by the irrigation works authorized by 
 the terms of this act shall be withdrawn from public entry. Thereafter when such 
 works shall have been so far constructed as to permit the delivery of water to any 
 portion of said withdrawn lands which the Secretary of the Interior shall deem proper 
 to open for entry, such portion of said lands shall be opened to entry in tracts, vary- 
 ing in size, but not exceeding one hundred and sixty acres, as may be determined 
 by the Secretary of the Interior, in accordance with the provisions of the reclama- 
 tion law, and any such entryman shall pay the proportionate share, as determined 
 by the said Secretary, of the construction cost of the canal or canals and appurtenant 
 structures, constructed for the irrigation and reclamation of said lands, as provided 
 for by this act, such construction cost to be paid in such installments, and at such 
 times as may be specified by the Secretary of the Interior, in accordance with the 
 provisions of the said reclamation law: Provided, That all persons who have served 
 in the United States Army, Navy, or Marine Corps during the war with Germany, 
 the war with Spain, or in the suppression of the insurrection in the Philippines, 
 and who have been honorably separated or discharged therefrom or placed in the 
 Regular Army or Navy Reserve, shall have the exclusive preference right for a period 
 of three months to enter said lands; and also, so far as practicable, preference shall 
 be given to said persons in all construction work authorized by this act: Provided, 
 That in the event such an entry shall be relinquished at any time prior to actual 
 residence upon the land by the entryman for not less than one year, lands so relin- 
 quished shall not be subject to entry for a period of sixty days after the filing and 
 notation of the relinquishnient in the local land office, and shall, after the expiration 
 of such sixty-day period, be subject to entry by the first qualified applicant. 
 
 SEC. 11. That for the purpose of constructing said dam and incidental worVs, and 
 acquiring lands and rights of way for said reservoir and incidental works, and con- 
 structing said main canal from Laguna Uam to Imperial and Coachella Valleys, and 
 appurtenant structures and acquiring rights of way therefor, there is hereby author- 
 ized to be appropriated, from any moneys ii : the Treasury not otherwise appropriated , 
 such amounts as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this act, not exceeding 
 in the aggregate the sum of $70,000,000, to be appropriated from time to time upon 
 estimates made by the Secretary of the Interior and transferred to the reclamation 
 fund established under said reclamation law. All moneys received under leases and 
 contracts authorized by sections 4 and 5 of this act, in excess of the expenseof operating 
 and maintaining said dam and incidental works, and not used for construction as pro- 
 vided in section 5 hereof, shall be covered into the Treasury of the United Stutes. 
 All moneys transferred from the General Treasury to the reclamation fund, and used 
 for the construction of any canal or appurtenant structures authorized under this act, 
 shall be repaid by the districts, communities, and lands benefited thereby, and the 
 Secretary of the Interior is hereby empowered, after a full hearing of all concerned, to 
 allocate the costs of any such canal and appurtenant structures among the various 
 districts, communities, and lands served thereby, according to the benefits derived 
 therefrom. 
 
 SKC. 1'2. Thai nothing in this act shall be construed as modifying in any manner 
 the existing contract. dat*':i October 'J:!. I'.US, between the Unitc'l States and Imperial 
 irrigation district, providing for a connection with Laguna Dam; but the Sec- 
 retary of the Interior is authorized to modify the said contract, with the consent of 
 the said district, in order to provide for the construction, in accordance with the terms 
 of this act, of a canal or canals and appurtenant structures, adequate to serve the lands 
 of said district, and other lands that may be served thereby, and to equitably allocate 
 the costs thereof. 
 
 SEC. 13. That wherever the words "political subdivision" or "political subdi- 
 visions" are used herein they shall be understood to include any State, district. 
 municipality, or other governmental organization.
 
 4 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVKR BASIN. 
 
 THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR. 
 
 Washington, June 14, 19..' :. 
 Hon. M. P. KIMKAID. 
 
 Chairman Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands. 
 
 House of Representatives . 
 
 MY DEAR MR. KINKAID: Reference is made to your letter of May 3, 1922, trans- 
 mitting copy of H. R. 11449. "A bill to provide for the protection and development I 
 of the Lower Colorado River Basin." with request for report. 
 
 The Colorado River is an interstate and international stream, the lower portion of 
 which is navigable. The proposed measure affects the entire stream system touching 
 the States of Arizona. California. Colorado. Nevada. New Mexico. Utah. Wyoming, 
 and the Republic of Mexico. The mean annual discharge of the Colorado River at 
 Lagima Dam. near Yuma, Ariz., is 16,400,000 acre-feet of water, as shown by meas- 
 urements taken in the years 1899 to 1920, inclusive. The problems arising from the 
 use of this river have been for many years the subject of much discussion and specula- 
 tion. They relate principally to flood control, irrigation, and power, and involve 
 differences actual and potential between private citizens, between States of this 
 Republic, and between the United States and the Republic of Mexico. 
 
 In 1921 the States above mentioned, by acts of their respective legislatures, pro- 
 vided for the appointment of commissioners to negotiate an agreement between said 
 States respecting the use of the water of said river, and by act of August 19, 1921 
 (42 Stat. 171), the United States consented to the making o"f such an agreement and 
 the President, under said act. appointed Mr. Herbert Hoover to represent the United 
 States in such negotiations. These several representatives have organized into what 
 is known as the Colorado River Commission, have held hearings in Washington and 
 in the West, but have as yet reached no agreement. 
 
 The act of May 18, 1920 (41 Stat. 600), authorized the Secretary of the Int-rior to 
 have made an examination and report on possible irrigation development of lands in 
 southern California from the waters of the Colorado River. A preliminary report under 
 this act was made by the Director of the Reclamation Service in 1920 and theame 
 was printed by your committee in January. 1921. under the title, "Preliminary report 
 on problems of Imperial Valley and vicinity." 
 
 Under the authority of said act of May 18, 1920, the preliminary report referred to 
 has been followed by a more detailed report made by the Director of the Reclamation 
 Service in January, 1922. This later report is now being printed as Senate Docu- 
 ment No. 143 under the title, "Report on problems of Imperial Valley and vicinity." 
 
 In the report last named, the following recommendations are made relative to the 
 use of the Colorado River, to wit: 
 
 1. It is recommended that through suitable legislation the United States undertake 
 the construction with Government funds of a high line canal from Laguna Dam to 
 the Imperial Valley, to be reimbursed by the lands benefited. 
 
 2. It is recommended that the public lands that can be reclaimed by such works 
 be reserved for settlement by ex-service men under conditions securing actual settle- 
 ment and cultivation. 
 
 3. It is recommended that through suitable legislation the United States undertake 
 the construction with Government funds of a r?s Tvoir at or n<?ar Boulder Canyon, on 
 the lower Colorado River, to be reimbursed by the revenues from leasing the power 
 privileges incident thereto. 
 
 4. It is recommended that any State interested in this development shall have the 
 right at its election to contribute an equitable part of the cost of the construction of 
 the reservoir and receive for its contribution a proportionate share of power at cost 
 to be determined by the Secretary of the Interior. 
 
 5. It is recommended that the Secretary of the Interior be empowered , after full ' 
 hearing of all concerned, to allow the various applicants their due proportion of the 
 power privileges and to allocate the cost and benefits of a high line canal. 
 
 6. It is recommended that every development hereafter authorized to be under- 
 taken on the Colorado River, by Federal Government or otherwise, be required in 
 both construction and operation to give priority of right and use: (1 ^ To river regu- 
 lat,ion and flood control: (2> to use of storage water for irrigation (3) to development 
 of power. 
 
 The high line canal from Laguna Dam to the Imperial Valley, referred to above in 
 recommendation Xo. 1 . is the subject of a separate report made in 1919 by a board 
 consisting of Messrs. Elwood Mead. W. W. Schlecht. and C. E. Grunsky. This report 
 is published under the title. "The All-American Canal." and a copy of same is in- /" 
 closed for your information. 
 
 H. R. H449 seemingly is intended to give legislative expression to a considerable 
 extent to the above-mentioned recommendations of the report on problems of Imperial
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 5 
 
 Valley and vicinity, which recommendations I have heretofore approved. The bill 
 would provide for a total appropriation from the General Treasury of $70.000,000. 
 Apparently it would be the plan to utilize about $48,000.000 for the building of a 
 dam and incidental works at or near Boulder Canyon, and the remainder for construc- 
 tion work upom the All-American Canal from Laguna Dam. 
 
 It is roughly estimated that for $48,000.000 there could be constructed at or near 
 Boulder Canyon, a dam 600 feet in height having a capacity of about 24. 000, 000 acre- 
 feet. The upper 5.000.000 acre-feet of this capacity could be utilized principally 
 for flood control, and incidentally for irrigation and power, 14,000.000 acre-feet of 
 the capacity could be utilized primarily for irrigation and power with preference 
 for the former, while the lower 5.000.000 acre-feet would be required for the storage 
 of silt. Such a reservoir would develop about 700.000 firm turbine horsepower, on 
 the assumption of the irrigation of a total area of 2.000.000 acres of land above the 
 reservoir, and a total area of 1.500.000 acres below the reservoir. The bill proposes 
 that the cost of this reservoir be not charged against any of the land to be irrigated 
 with its waters, but that such cost be returned from the sale of the right to use the 
 water of the reservoir for the generation of the electrical power. 
 
 The proposed reservoir would be of great importance in controlling the destructive 
 floods of the lower Colorado. Through the deposit of silt the river has for years been 
 gradually building up a great delta cone across the head of the Gulf of California, and 
 back of this cone it has been gradually elevating its channel. As a result, in periods 
 of high water it breaks its low and unstable banks, overflowing the surrounding country 
 and producing great loss of property. These floods are a particular menace to large 
 developments in and about Yuma, Ariz., and in the Imperial Valley in California. 
 They have been guarded against to a certain extent by the construction of expensive 
 levees, which, however, afford a most inadequate protection. A large reservoir in 
 the vicinity of Boulder Canyon could be so used as substantially to eliminate the flood 
 menace of the Colorado River, but in order to secure complete protection it would be 
 necessary to take further precautions against the floods from the Gila River, which 
 joins the Colorado a short distance above Yuma. However, the floods in the latter 
 are of short duration and of relatively small total volume, and as a rule occur in winter 
 and do not coincide with those on the main Colorado. 
 
 The suggested reservoir at or near Boulder Canyon would provide a water supply 
 for the irrigation of large areas of fertile land in the lower Colorado Basin that can not 
 be developed without the storage of water-. The area of new lands in California and 
 Ari/onia feasible of irrigation under such a reservoir is roughly estimated at 700,000 
 acres, while in addition a more stable and certain water supply could be provided for 
 520,000 acres heretofore irrigated. 
 
 The generation of electrical power at the proposed reservoir would have an important 
 relation to the conservation of the oil and coal supply of the Nation. 
 
 The cost of the main All-American Canal, including connections at Laguna Dam, is 
 estimated at $30,000,000. The 515,000 acres in the Imperial irrigation district and the 
 432,000 acres of new lands above referred to could all be served with irrigation water 
 from this canal. At the present time the Imperial irrigation district is dependent for 
 a water supply upon a very uncertain and unsatisfactory diversion at Hanlon Heading 
 and conveyance through a canal on Mexican soil. The substantial difficulties arising 
 from this situation would be obviated by the construction of the All-American Canal. 
 
 Of the lands irrigable from the developments proposed by H. R. 11449, 166,900 
 irrigable acres are public lands in California, and these would be opened to entry 
 with preference rights to former soldiers . 
 
 The text of the contract of October 23, 1918. between the United States and the 
 Imperial irrigation district referred to in section 12 of the bill appears on pages 67 to 
 71, inclusive, of the copy of report on "The All-American Canal" transmitted here- 
 with. No actual construction work has been done by the district under this con- 
 tract, but the sum of $96.000 has been paid by the district to the United States to 
 apply upon the total obligation of $1.600.000" incurred under the contract for the 
 right to connect with and use Laguna Dam. 
 
 I am in general agreement with the provisions of the bill, but there are other con- 
 siderations which have impressed themselves upon me and which I think justify the 
 suggestion of the following amendments: 
 
 Page 10, line 12. insert after the word "district": "Or to enter into a new contract 
 or contracts with the said district, or any private corporation, or any corporation 
 subsidiary to such district. " 
 
 Page 10. line 16. insert after the word "thereof" and before the period: l'mri<l<'<l. 
 That nothing in this section shall be construed to limit the authority of the Secretary 
 of the Interior to enter into other contracts for the disposition of waters of the Rio 
 Colorado where such contracts are not in conflict with the terms of this act or in abro- 
 gation of contracts already entered into, nor with the laws or treaties of the United 
 States, or with the rights of any State. "
 
 6 DKYKI.ol'.MKXT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 
 
 It is rather a delicate matter to refer to foreign relations in a report of this character. 
 However, it is a well known fact that the Colorado is an international stream. Should 
 it (,( possible '" enter inio a contract directly with a company or corporation organized 
 or doing i. urines.- under the laws of Mexico, and should such contract entered into 
 by such Mexican corporation or individuals operating in Mexico receive the ap- 
 proval of the then authorities of Mexico, claims for damage or any complaint as to 
 injury arising from the supposed ignoring of treaty obligations would be avoided. 
 Such' result may possibly be brought about without diplomatic negotiations or com- 
 plications should the amendments proposed be inserted in the bill. 
 
 The last amendment is intended to refer particularly to the use of waters under 
 the Yuma project, where the same are being conducted through the canals of said 
 project and the excess over our day to day use discharged at the ends of such canals. 
 Such discharged waters may be contracted to be used as a day to day license, to be 
 used by parties within the United States who may take the same as a day to day 
 license and apply the waters to beneficial use beyond the borders of the United 
 States. 
 
 With much diffidence and hesitation, as I do not deem it my duty nor within my 
 proper authority to suggest legislation to Congress. I am handing you herewith a 
 draft of two sections which might be considered by the committee as a substitute 
 for section 11 of the bill. These sections, as suggested, are as follows: 
 
 SKC. 11. That for the purpose of constructing said dam and incidental works, 
 together with the machinery necessary for generating the power to be developed 
 thereby, and of acquiring lands and right of way for said reservoir and dam and inci- 
 dental works there is hereby authorized to be appropriated the sum of $ , to be 
 paid from time to time upon requisition of the Secretary of the Interior by the Secretary 
 of the Treasury. 
 
 ' The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to issue fifty-year 
 bonds of the United States, in the sum of $ - , in series, and to cause to be sold 
 the same from time to time as needed, the proceeds of such sales to be deposited for 
 such dam, reservoir, and power purposes. Such bonds shall bear interest at the 
 rate of per cent, payable semiannually and redeemable after thirty years, in the 
 order of the series issue'd thereof. 
 
 "The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to enter into 
 contracts for the sale or lease of the hydroelectric power to be developed through the 
 construction and use of such dam and machinery, at.such charges, by sales, leases, or 
 rentals, as will produce revenues sufficient to meet the semiannual interest upon 
 such bonds, and to provide a sinking fund for the redemption of such bonds. Such 
 contract for sales, leases, rentals, shall be under the terms of this section and in accord 
 with the provisions of sections 4 and 5 of this bill as construed together. The Secre- 
 tary of the Interior may assist in the sale of such bonds and the provision for the pay- 
 ment of interest thereupon by entering into negotiations prior to the completion of 
 such dam with parties or municipal or political corporations for the allocation of 
 stated amounts of power to such parties or corporations, upon the payment of a bonus 
 over and above the par value of such bonds, in consideration of such prior rights of 
 allocation, and the results of such negotiations shall be communicated to the Secretary 
 of the Treasury for his final action and approval in the delivery of the bonds. 
 
 "SEC. 12. That there.is hereby authorized to be appropriated from any moneys in 
 the Treasury not otherwise appropriated such amounts as may be necessary to carry 
 out the purposes of this act in the construction of said main canals or other canalt 
 from the Laguna Dam to the public lands which may be irrigated, and to the Imperial 
 and Coachella Valleys, with appurtenant structures and for the purpose of acquiring 
 rights of way, etc.. the sum of $ , to be made available from time to time, upon 
 estimates made by the Secretary of the Interior, such amounts to be paid out of the 
 fund designated as the reclamation fund heretofore established under the reclamation 
 law of 1902. All moneys received under leases and contracts for the sale of water 
 rights, the delivery of water, together with repayments of construction charges agreed 
 to bft made by the present users of water in the Imperial Valley, Coachella Valley, 
 and others, shall be paid into the credit of the general reclamation fund. The cost of 
 operating and maintaining such canals and works and the delivery of such water 
 under contract or otherwise shall be collected under the terms of the general reclama- 
 tion act and amendments thereto. Any moneys transferred from the General Treasury 
 to the reclamation fund for purposes herein set forth and used for the construction of 
 any canal or appurtenant structures authorized under this act shall be repaid by the 
 districts, communities, and lands benefited thereby, and the Secretary of the Interior 
 is hereby empowered, after a hearing of all concerned to allocate the costs of any 
 such canal and the appurtenant, structures among the various districts, communities, 
 and lands served thereby, according to the benefits derived therefrom."
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 7 
 
 (Renumber section ]2 of the bill as No. 13, and No. 13 as section 14.) 
 
 I think that from the report as hereinbefore first set forth it must be apparent that 
 sufficient sums can be recovered from the sale of power at the dam to finance the 
 construction by amortization, as suggested, of amounts to be derived from the sale 
 of Government bonds, without imposing any further burden upon the taxpayers of 
 the United States and yet in line with good and sound finance. 
 
 Also, 1 would suggest that the apparent intent of the bill would be better expressed 
 if in line 10 on page 5 the word "proportion" were replaced by the word "ratio," 
 and in line 15 on the same page the word "proportion" were replaced by the words 
 "proportionate part." 
 
 I find myself able to approve the adoption of this proposed legislation with the 
 direct amendments suggested and with or without the substitution of the proposed 
 financial sections for section 11 of the bill as it lies before me. 
 Very respectfully, 
 
 ALBERT B. FALL, 
 
 Secretary of the Interior. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. PHILIP D. SWING, MEMBER OF CONGRESS 
 
 FROM CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Mr. SWING. The report of the Interior Department is favorable to the general pro- 
 gram outlined in my bill. The principal modification which the Secretary offers is 
 that instead of an authorization of an- appropriation of money direct from the Treas- 
 ury a bond issue be authorized to cover the cost of this particular project and that 
 the principal and interest be paid out of the revenues to be derived from the project. 
 
 This matter has been before your committee heretofore. In 1919 I had the honor 
 of appearing here with a delegation representing the Imperial irrigation district and 
 presenting to you what appeared to us to be a very serious situation on the lower 
 Colorado River, meriting the attention of the Federal Government. 
 
 I think that this committee was impressed with the importance and seriousness of 
 the problem and felt that it was a matter of which the Federal Government should 
 take cognizance, because following our representations it reported a bill which was 
 passed by Congress authorizing an investigation by governmental officials, with 
 instructions to them to report to Congress what ought to be done in the matter. 
 
 This investigation has now been made, and the report of the Secretary of the Inte- 
 rior covering the same, together with his recommendations, is now before you. The 
 report is based upon an exhaustive study of the problems of the Colorado River made 
 by Director Davis, of the Reclamation Service, ably assisted by a board of eminent 
 engineers, who cooperated with him in his investigations and advised with him in 
 the conclusions reached . 
 
 We are here to-day to say that we accept the report and recommendations that have 
 been made to you by these Government officials, and are ready to cooperate in carrying 
 them into effect. We believe that if these recommendations are followed out it will 
 result in a proper solution of the problems of the Imperial Valley and of the lower 
 Colorado River. We go further; we believe the recommendations of the Secretary of 
 the Interior offer the only solution of the problem now confronting us. 
 
 As I stated to you when I was here before, the Imperial Valley is menaced by three 
 factors, one of which is the Mexican international complication; another of which is the 
 interstate complication with the Government project in the Yuma Valley, Ariz.; 
 and the third is with the forces of the river itself in flood times. 
 
 The difficulty of operating this, the largest single irrigated unit in the United States, 
 is clearly shown when we look at the map, where it is seen that about 60 miles of the 
 main canal of the Imperial irrigation district nins through Mexico. When the water 
 is taken across the line into Mexico in order to skirt a low range of sand hills which 
 separates Imperial Valley from the river, the Imperial irrigation district loses all con- 
 trol over that water, both physical and legal, and thereafter it is controlled by aMexican 
 corporation until it is finally returned to the American side i. e., the part of the water 
 which is not used inMexico. At the present time the stock of that Mexican corporation 
 is held by the Imperial irrigation district, but I will discuss that point a little later. 
 
 The problem of as big and complicated a business as this, doing business under two 
 flags, is almost self-evident. We maintain a fleet of 9 or 10 dredges in the main canal. 
 All of the red tape of the customhouses has to be gone through every time one of these 
 crosses the international boundary line. We have to put labor over there, replacing 
 those who quit; all the complications created by the immigration laws of two nations 
 have to be complied with every time a laborer goes across. 
 
 The same is true of getting supplies across as well as the necessary material to repair, 
 improve, and maintain not only the canals but also the flood levee systems. The
 
 8 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BABIX. 
 
 interminable delays are not only costly but at times make operation well-nigh im- 
 possible. Then there is the payment of money in various forms to the Mexican 
 Government, called taxes. They have as many different kinds over there as we have, 
 and a few besides, all of which are patterned on" the principle of all the traffic will bear. 
 There are import duties and export duties. There is the poll tax on the employees 
 and another on the mules and horses: of course, there is one on the supplies which" the 
 men, mules, and horses eat. There is a tax on the water sold. Finally there are ( I 
 special assessments of various kinds some payable in money and some payable in ^ 
 work, such as road construction, bridge buildinsr. and the like. They even charge us 
 an import duty on the material that goes into the levees by which their o .vn live- and 
 property are protected, and then discount our money when we go to pay their taxes 
 and charges. 
 
 That country, as you all know, particularly those of you from near the border, is 
 subject to sudden uprisings of various kinds, and it would be a golden opportunity 
 for a band of insurrectos who were striving to either oust the present governing force 
 which is at Mexicala, the capital of that district, or who were trying, like Villa, when 
 he attacked Columbus to force the intervention of the United States, to destroy with 
 a stick of dynamite the canal or some of its principal works, thereby cutting off not 
 only the Mexican capital but also the Imperial Valley from all water, including 
 domestic water. 
 
 As you know, the Imperial Valley is noted for its aridity rain fall, varying from 1 to 
 6 inches not enough, of course, to produce any crops. There are no wells except 
 about a dozen in one narrow section of the country and in most, if not all, of these the 
 water is salty and warm. So the people of Imperial Valley are absolutely dependent 
 for their water upon that coming from the Colorado River and their ability to get this 
 depends upon the good will of the citizens of a foreign country principally noted for 
 its lack of good will toward us. 
 
 In addition to that the country through which this canal runs is subject to cultiva- 
 tion, and about 190,000 acres of it is under cultivation now, and a good deal more of it 
 is capable of being brought under cultivation with some slight changes in the physical 
 situation down there. One syndicate alone owns 800,000 acres. This land has the 
 legal right to take half the water in the canal and the physical power to take it all. 
 
 When I say that we have had in the Imperial Valley year after year water shortages, 
 some of which have cost the valley in loss of crops as high as $5,000,000 or $6,000,000 
 in one year, and that the Mexican lands have never known a water shortage, you see 
 the position of advantage they are in and the position of disadvantage we are in. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. What is the source of the Colorado River, Mr. Swing; does it origi- 
 nate in Mexico or in this country? 
 
 Mr. SWING. It originates entirely in this country none of it originates in Mexico. 
 We divert our water from the river on the American side of the line, about a mile and 
 a half from the international boundary line; and then the canal system as originally 
 laid out years ago, following the line of least resistance, crosses the international 
 boundary line and for about 60 miles is in Mexico and finally comes back into the 
 United States again near Calexico, Calif. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. You divert it before it reaches Mexico? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. An engineering survey in which the Government participated 
 has laid out an all- American canal route, and its construction is recommended in the 
 Secretary's report and is authorized in this bill. The present situation from the 
 standpoint of operation is one of confusion, of chaos, and of utter impossibility of 
 carrying on this great business which spends on an average of $2,000,000 a year, as can 
 be seen. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. I do not know whether I fully understand you, Mr. Swing, when 
 you stated that the Mexicans had never known a water shortage but that the Imperial 
 Valley in this country had. If you take the water out before it reaches Mexico, win- 
 is it that this country has suffered a shortage of water and Mexico has not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Over on the map [referring to map on the committee room wall], Mr. 
 Hudspeth, you see that narrow dark line representing the canal that comes out of the 
 river just above the international boundary line in the United States, and then goes 
 across the boundary and back again in a big loop. There is ctiltivated land in Mexico 
 all along that canal, and they have put in diversions in this canal wherever and 
 whenever they wanted to do so and take as much water as they wanted. The com- 
 pany which owns and operates this canal in Mexico is a Mexican company, of which 
 the Imperial irrigation district at the present time is holding the stock, and in that 
 way controlling this Mexican company, subject to the laws, rules, and regulations of ^ 
 Mexico, and this is the point I want to get at now: The charter or concession of this f 
 Mexican company from the Mexican Government expressly provides that no foreign 
 State or government shall ever own the stock of this company, nor shall any foreign 
 government ever make any representations to Mexico regarding this company or its 
 business.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 9 
 
 When this original company, which laid this system out, went bankrupt and the 
 farmers and the settlers in the imperial Valley organized a district and bid it in. paying 
 $3,000,000 for what was there on the ground, both in the United States and Mexico, 
 they inherited this dual system of one company in Mexico and another in the United 
 States, and it being the only thing they coul'd do they took over the stock of this 
 Mexican company and now hold it in order to effect some kind of harmony of operation. 
 Any day, my belief is that Mexico could raise the question that this Mexican company 
 is violating its charter and could declare its concession forfeited, and then you would 
 have a situation like two mules on a team, one of them going in one direction and the 
 other going in another direction, without any control over the situation at all. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Is this Mexican canal company different from the Mexicao land 
 company? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. This Mexican canal company owns no land except the rights of 
 way and is not engaged in any land cultivation at all. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. The company that you referred to a few moments ago as having a 
 charter from the Mexican Government containing these provisions you 
 
 Mr. SWING (interposing). It is simply an operating company in Mexico, but the 
 Mexican Government controls it. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Is it in any way connected with the land company? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Xo; that is separate. As I have said, this Mexican company is responsi- 
 ble to Mexican officials at Mexico City. The Imperial irrigation district is responsible 
 to the State officials at Sacramento. Calif. Even now it is difficult to get the two 
 Governments to agree to the same proposed improvement. For instance, we wanted 
 to put in a cut-off in Mexico to increase the grade of our main canal, as was recom- 
 mended to us by our consulting engineers. The California State authorities approved 
 it but the Mexican authorities have never permitted us to use it. Under the State 
 law of California if the district wants to make any prominent improvement, it must 
 prepare plans, send them up to Sacramento; the State engineer and the bonding 
 commission must investigate and approve or disapprove them; on the other hand, 
 if the proposed work happens to be in Mexico, we must also send a duplicate of such 
 plans down to Mexico City, and they look at it from the Mexican point of view. 
 
 It is possible and it has happened that the American supervising power said, "This 
 is a good thing, do it'': while the Mexican Government said, i- This is not a good thing; 
 it will interfere with getting water out for Mexican lands. We disapprove it." 
 
 So it is almost an impossible situation, and points to the necessity of getting our 
 irrigation system out of Mexico. 
 
 Mr. LINEBERGER. Mr. Swing, is it not also a fact that according to this concession 
 which the Mexican company has that they actually control 50 per cent of all the 
 water that passes through that canal, irrespective of the fact of whether they may 
 contribute to its upkeep or not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Oh, yes. 
 
 Mr. LINEBERGER. And by virtue of the physical conditions can take the water 
 before it gets into the valley? 
 
 Mr. SWING. They control it all. The concession reads somewhat to this affect 
 a full copy of the concession is set out in the hearings before this committee in 1919 
 one half of the water which this company secures, whether diverted in the United 
 States or in Mexico, must on demand of Mexican lands be supplied to Mexican lands; 
 the other half may be disposed of elsewhere. There is no obligation to return any of 
 it to the United States. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. The Imperial Valley at the present time gets its water from 
 this canal after it goes through Mexican territory? 
 
 Mr. S \VING. Yes; all of it. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. And under the propositions contained in your bill, if the 
 Boulder Dam be constructed there would be a new canal to the Imperial Valley, 
 no part of which canal would be in Mexican territory? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is it exactly; and. as outlined in the bill, that canal would be, 
 I might say, a joint investment for the United States and the Imperial irrigation 
 district to supply a great tract of land which the United States itself is the proprietor 
 of, as well as the lands now within the district. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Would that be upon the theory that the Mexicans have no 
 vested rights in the water? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think that is a correct statement. In the hearings in 1919 that was 
 gone into very fully. I filed with the committee the opinion of the former Attorney 
 General, Judson Harmon, in which he said there was no such thing as international 
 water rights in adjudicating the Rio Grande River conflict. 
 
 The Secretary of State also filed with the committee an opinion that there was 
 nothing in the international law or any of our treaties with Mexico which would
 
 10 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BAS1X. 
 
 Erevent the United States from taking out in the United States and using in the United 
 tates water of an American stream while it flowed on American soil. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. As I recall it, Secretary Lansing approved the plan for building 
 the all- American canal. He said there was no international treaty against it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. In frankness, I will add that he said he thought when the time 
 came to take the matter up with Mexico or Mexico took it up with us that he would 
 favor a recognition to some extent of their moral claims, but it was not what can be 
 termed a legal claim under any treaty or international law. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. They claimed 20 per cent of the water from the Elephant Butte 
 and never contributed a dollar. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Mr. Hudspeth, you know as well as I do that many people many 
 people in New Mexico, Texas, and Colorado think the giving away of the water of 
 the Rio Grande to Mexico was something our Government ought not to have done. 
 Senator Thomas, in a powerful speech in the Senate covering two days, said abso- 
 lutely that our Government had been fooled, and he even charged fraud in the making 
 of that treaty, and he closed his speech by saying that "while it is too late to save 
 the waters of the Rio Grande, because the treaty has now been ratified, yet I say 
 this is a warning that it may not happen again on the Colorado." 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask the gentleman a question? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Have you stated where the stock is owned in that canal which is 
 located in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is owned by a Mexican company, which was in existence when the 
 people of the Imperial Valley through the Imperial Irrigation District bought the irri- 
 gation system and so got physical possession of the stock of that compnay at that time. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Who did? 
 
 Mr. SWING. The directors of the Imperial Irrigation District. The stock to-day is 
 in the vault of the Imperial Valley Irrigation District, for whatever it iray be worth. 
 It w"as a part of what the district got for its $3,000,000. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. That is, the stock of the Canal Co.? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Of the Mexidan Canal Co. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Where do the owners of the land along that ditch live mostly? 
 
 Mr. SWING. They mostly live in the United States. The Southern Pacific at one 
 time owned a large tract of land, close to 100,000 acres. The Cudahy Packing Co. 
 has a 16,000-acre farm down there. What is known as the Los Angeles Times Syn- 
 dicate, or "the Colorado River Land & Water Co.," is made up of American capitalists 
 who owned some 800,000 acres just below the boundary in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Those people own the land th,at takes the water that otherwise goes to 
 your valley. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. They are the interested parties there? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think they are to that extent; they prefer to keep the water in their 
 own control for their own benefit, because they can get it this way, whenever they 
 want it, as much as they want, and can put up a pretty good argument as to what 
 they should pay for it. 
 
 The second menace of the Imperial Valley is the Yuma Government project, and 
 when I put it that way I am perfectly willing to turn it around and put it the other 
 way, that the Imperial Valley menaces the Yuma reclamation project. What I 
 mean by that is this: When Colonel Ockerson failed to close the break in the Colorado 
 River at what is called the Bee River, the whole river started flowing down into what 
 was originally Volcano Lake, and then working its way out into the Gulf in a round- 
 about way; because of the increase from the break into Volcano Lake the river bed 
 began cutting back, and this cutting worked back up the river past our heading. 
 Thus the lowering of the bed resulted in lowering the water in the river arid made 
 it difficult to get the water out into our canal, especially during low seasons. 
 
 The problem of getting water out of the river is ordinarily a serious one, even with- 
 out the difficulty which I have just described. This river is a slow sluggish stream 
 moat of the year, and during this period it deposits a great deal of silt in its own bed 
 gradually building it up and then when the river rises and increases in volume and 
 velocity, the weight of the water, the pressure, and the velocity begins to scour its 
 bed out, and nature thus sort of takes care of the flood waters by deepening its bed 
 to accommodate the volume of the stream. After three or four weeks of this scouring 
 process at high water the river generally drops from a flow of 150,000 second-feet to 
 about 20,000 second-feet and as it falls it becomes an engineering problem how to 
 get the water out of the river without some control or diversion works. We have no 
 diversion works in the river at our in-take. We simply have a great 700-foot in-take 
 or headgate set in the bank of the river. At the time we built it the silt was below
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 11 
 
 the low scouring point. After the break into Bee River had worked back up stream to 
 our heading the river scoured its bed down below that. So it now becomes necessary 
 every year to put in a diversion dam. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How much above the Mexican line is your intake? 
 
 Mr. SWING. It is about a mile and a half. In 1916 the settlers on the Yuma project 
 in Arizona went to their courts and got an injunction against our rebuilding the dam 
 in the river, because they considered it a menace to their valley, which is also liable 
 to overflow from the Colorado. They feared with that dam in there a freshet might 
 bring down high water before we could get the dam out to let the water go by, and 
 it might result in the river breaking in on them and destroying their valley. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. That is just across the river from your intake? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. It is the Yuma reclamation project. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How high above your intake is the place where you would have the 
 intake for the Ail-American canal? 
 
 Mr. SWING. About 25 miles upstream at the Laguna Dam built by the United 
 States Government and originally intended, as I am informed, to irrigate lands in 
 < 'alifornia, as well as in Arizona, but which is now used practically entirely for Arizona 
 lands. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. That is where the intake for the All-American would be? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is where it ought to be, in our opinion. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is that your plan? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is our plan. We have a contract which we signed with Secretary 
 Lane when he was in office, with the consent and approval of the Yuma people, to 
 pay 1,600,000 for the privilege of going up there and using that dam jointly with 
 the Yuma reclamation project. We have paid, I think. 896,000 on that according 
 to the contract; we have met all our payments as they fell due. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Do you have to take out that loose-rock dam every time there is 
 flood water? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes; absolutely. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. How do you get it out? 
 
 Mr. SWING. We had to demolish it; blow it up with dynamite. The War Depart- 
 ment is absolutely in control of this river. We have to get their permission to con- 
 struct the dam. They name such terms as they think proper, and they tell us when 
 the dam must go out; in fact, we have two authorities to tell us Yuma, while con- 
 senting from year to year to our building this dam, keep their injunction alive and 
 require us to meet all their terms and conditions. We agreed that whenever they 
 tell us to take it out we will take it out. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. May I ask a question? Does the land served by the present 
 canal, which, as I understand, runs through Mexican territory, or, in other words, 
 do the lands served both in Mexico and in southern California utilize all of the waters 
 of the Colorado at all times except flood stages? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Not quite as strong as that. There have been times when, during low 
 years, all of the water was diverted at our heading. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You may have stated it to the committee already. But what is the 
 approximate number of acres now irrigated and could be irrigated on the California 
 side and the amount that is now irrigated and can be irrigated on the American side? 
 
 Mr. SWING. In Mr. Davis's report he gives over 2,000,000 acres below the Boulder 
 Canyon in Nevada, Arizona, California, and Mexico and says about 60 per cent 
 of that, I believe, is in the United States. 
 
 Mi-. RAKER. Right there, you say 60 per cent of it is in the L T nited States and 40 
 per cent is in Mexico. If you have the ail-American canal, how will you divide the 
 water between Mexico and the United States? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That would be a matter for agreement or treaty. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Would that be the same with the canal now that is there? Suppose 
 the canal was to continue where it is now and be enlarged, would that same condition 
 apply as to the agreement or treaty? 
 
 Mr. SWING. There would be this difference: If the canal is enlarged and left in 
 Mexico where it is now, then we would be the ones who would be asking Mexico to 
 consent to put a limitation on the amount of water she would use, while if an all- 
 American canal were built, then Mexico will be the one who would be requesting 
 the United States to agree to put a limitation on the amount of water Americans 
 would use in the United States. In one case Mexico would hold all the trump cards; 
 in the other we would. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Just amplify that, if you will. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Ever since Mr. Taft was President, and while he was President, various' 
 interests have urged upon the Government to take up with Mexico and to adjudicate 
 a treaty that would determine what the rights were. Personally I will say that I 
 feel that every year we put it off Mexico is getting more and more land in cultivation
 
 12 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 and a broader basis for a moral claim to water. I understand that Mr. Taft actually 
 selected the American commissioners, although they were not publicly named. 
 Then nothing came of it. The matter was 'presented to President Wilson while he 
 was President. I talked to Secretary Lane about it, but it was impossible to get 
 Mexico to agree to anything our Government wanted. I think down on the Rio Grande 
 there are some islands in the river. There is a treaty in existence already that says 
 that the representatives of the two Governments must meet and adjudicate their 
 respective rights to these islands. We can not even get a meeting with the Mexican 
 officials under that treaty, which is already in existence. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. We never did negotiate; we just took the island. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think that was a proper procedure under the circumstances. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Would that be the procedure if we get the All-American Canal if they 
 would not come through? I am just trying to get at how we are going to get this finally 
 adjudicated. Take the water as much as needed, and then let them come through? 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is the way God planned it, when he put Mexico on the lower end 
 of the river, that Mexico should get what water was left after we got through using it. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Under your bill, is it contemplated that additional lands 
 would be reclaimed? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Aside from those now being served? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. The United States Government itself has ] 70, 000 acres of land 
 adjoining the Imperial irrigation district, which is worthless now, but which will be 
 immensely valuable if water is put on it. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Do you estimate that with the plan and scheme in view that 
 it would require all of the waters of the river? 
 
 Mr. SWING. No. oh, no. You mean the flood waters? 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Oh, no. Mr. Davis gives a little over 2.000,000 acres of land in the 
 United States and Mexico below Bowlder Canyon Dam. Three acre-feet is the duty 
 of water per acre per year; three times 2,000.000 would be 6.000,000 acre-feet annually 
 of water. The average annual run-off of the river at Bowlder Canyon is 17,500,000 
 acre-feet. This dam would have a storage capacity of anywhere from 21.000.000 
 acre-feet to 31,000.000 acre-feet, the idea being to have it big enough so as to equate 
 the flow not only between months in the same years but between years, so as to take 
 a reasonable span of six or seven years in order to carry the surplus of the wet years 
 over for the benefit of the dry years. Thus the maximum of down-stream develop- 
 ment would probably not use in excess of 6,000,000 acre-feet, leaving 11,500,000 
 acre-feet for up-stream development. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. During the dry season would you require all of the natural 
 flow of the stream in addition 
 
 Mr. SWING (interposing). If this new dam was not put in? 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Frankly, yes, if there was no storage. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Then if there are large agricultural areas up the river for which 
 no provision has been yet made to take care of, they would be left dry would they 
 not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. If Boulder Canyon Dam or some other dam is not built these upriver 
 areas must remain dry because all the low flow of the natural stream has now been 
 appropriated and to undertake any considerable upstream development which would 
 substantially diminish the flow of the river to the down stream communities would 
 of course result in litigation. 
 
 With Boulder Dam constructed these areas in the upper States could safely be 
 developed because as I have already pointed out the total that could be used in the 
 lower Colorado, taking the average use which is about three acre feet of water per 
 year, would be 6,000,000 acre-feet at the outside when all of this land in the United 
 States and Mexico has been put under cultivation, and the probabilities are that all 
 of that land will not be put under cultivation. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. What I am trying to get at is this: Would this scheme in any 
 way interfere with the taking out of water above the Boulder Dam along the course 
 of the Colorado River during the ordinary irrigation season, if you have conserved the 
 flood waters by your dam. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Absolutely not. Mr. Davis and Secretary Fall, as I read their report, 
 say "no." 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How much more land can be irrigated by the American canal than 
 through the present dam which they now have? 
 
 Mr. SWING. About 400,000 acres. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. On the California side?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 13 
 
 Mr. SWING. On the California side. I want to finish up this Yuma situation. 
 
 Our district directors went over there just a few weeks ago to secure permission to 
 put this weir in as is necessary, if the people in the Imperial Valley are to get 
 even domestic water, and they said they would take the matter under advisement 
 and see what steps we are taking to really get away from our present difficulties. It 
 has been on condition that we get away from our present heading and go up to Laguna 
 Dam that we have received permission in the past and their injunctions are in effect 
 against us every year. We have to put up a half million dollars bond each year 
 and in addition we sign an agreement that we will be responsible to Yuma and their 
 citizens for every dollar's worth of damage that might result from a break in that river. 
 
 So I say Yuma is a menace to us because we never know when they are going to 
 ref us? us permission to construct the dam ; and we are a menace to them for the reason 
 which I have already stated. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask you a question? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. When did you last tear that dam down? 
 
 Mr. SWING. It is always taken out just before the high water comes down; this 
 year about a month ago. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. How long does it take to get permission from Yuma to put it back? 
 
 Mr. SWING. This year we have not obtained permission yet. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The flood season is not yet over. 
 
 Mr. SWING. When we see the sun rise we know that it is going to set, and when we 
 see the floods coming, we know that it is going to be followed by a low river and very 
 quickly, and we are very anxious. 
 
 Mr. RAKER (interposing). What interests do these people represent who have 
 obtained this injunction? 
 
 Mr. SWING. It is the farmers and settlers on the Government project in the Yuma 
 Valley, which is just across the river from where we have our dam. 
 
 I think if I myself was in the Yuma Valley I might feel somewhat exercised about 
 the matter I want to speak frankly about that. Secretary Lane at the time when 
 I was here before I expect to file data before the hearings are through to show that 
 these injunctions are alive and that we are tied up as tight as it is possible to be tied 
 with the situation now Secretary Lane said referring to this dam: 
 
 "This dam is such a menace to the safety of the Yuma Valley that it can only be 
 permitted as a temporary expedient, pending some adequate provision for fore- 
 stalling its necessity, such as this contract provides for" that is, the contract for 
 connecting with the Laguna Dam "and unless the Imperial district takes immediate 
 steps to secure a satisfactory and permanent method to divert the water of the Colorado 
 River, I will not again favor the placing of such a structure in the river. " 
 
 The acting Secretary of War, Benedict Crowell, at the same time wrote us a letter, 
 in granting us the permit. He said: 
 
 "That dam, " referring to the diversion dam, "is regarded as a serious menace to 
 the Yuma project, the further toleration of which can be justified by this department 
 only in connection with convincing proof, such as ratification of the proposed agree- 
 ment and diligence in carrying out the provisions of a definite and dependable plan 
 of diversion. " 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That is the dam which you maintain at the head of the Imperial 
 Valley now? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How will those people get the water out of the dam if the American 
 side do not use it any more down on the Mexican side? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I do not know. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I am seeking information on that. Will they have to get it through the 
 same ditch and dam? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Most of the time they could get some water out of the river through this 
 heading which we will virtually abandon. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. They could not if Yuma objected? 
 
 Mr. SWING. They could get it out except in low season. Or they could make a con- 
 tract with the district or with the Secretary of the Interior or the Government, and 
 get their water in that way. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask this question, Judge Swing: If you abandon that heading, 
 could not the Yuma people make it impossible for anybody in Mexico to get water out 
 of it? 
 
 I Mr. SWING. Oh, yes, certainly; and they would object, of course, to putting in any 
 more dams. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. It does not really deprive the Mexicans of anything they have got? 
 Mr. SWING. No; I think they would have the property that costs us very close to 
 $3,000,000.
 
 14 DKVELOPMEXT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. It would not help them any if they could not use it? 
 
 Mr. SWING. The third factor and the main far-tor which threatens the Imperial 
 A'alley is the flood water of the river itself. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask one more question? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Ye?, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is the Reclamation Sendee of the I'nited States the plaintiff in that s 
 proceeding? 
 
 Mr. SWING. No. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Who is it? 
 
 Mr. SWING. The Yuma County Water Users' Association is the plaintiff. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Before you go on to the others, what is the name of that governor we 
 met down there a year ago last spring? 
 
 Mr. XICKEKSON. We cannot keep up with them. They have had four governors 
 during the last vear. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. When we were down there we spent a day with the governor of Lower 
 California, the man who used to be the banker, and he told us that they were ready 
 and willing and anxious to adjust this matter with the United States and would do 
 everything they could. I wanted to learn why they were holding it up and he talked 
 it over openly and frankly with Mr. Xickerson and others and they said they were 
 not, that they were very anxious and willing to get it to Mexico Citv. and I wondered 
 what has been done in getting this matter adjusted so we would not have this bugaboo. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think the State Department has under three different administra- 
 tions taken the matter up with Mexico and has gotten nowhere. The present situa- 
 tion amply suits them. While they have no legal prior water right, they have some- 
 thing just as good the physical control of all the water. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Explain just how it suits them. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I say. while they have no legal priority of ri^ht to the water, they have 
 the physical possession of it. which enables them to absolutely control the use of the 
 water and enables them to take all thev want and when they want it. 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. At the expense of the people on this side of the line? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. sir; we bear the brunt of the expense. They pay something, but 
 it is nowhere near their proportion of the full cost of getting the water in and keeping 
 the flood out. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Swing, does the recent decision of the Supreme Court in the 
 Colorado-Wyoming case throw any light on your situation? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Oh. not with reference to Mexico. It seems to me. however, that that 
 decision did furnish the Colorado River Commission a yardstick with which to meas- 
 ure off the rights of the various States in and to the waters of the river. Do you not 
 think so, Mr. Leatherwood? 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. We do not propose to measure our cloth by that yardstick, we 
 will say very frankly to you. gentlemen, unless we have to. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Well, the decision of the United States Supreme Court is usually con- 
 sidered final, even when we do not like the decision. 
 
 Mr. SWING. This river, as you know, as all silt-bearing rivers, continues to build 
 itself up and up like the crater of a volcano, until it gets up to where the law of gravit \ 
 begins to operate and pulls it off down one bank or the other. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Slop over? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Xot only slops over; it goes over bodily to one side or the other, and 
 geologists and people who have studied the Imperial Valley and that country down 
 there say they believe that that has been the habit of the river for a long period of 
 time. Discharging into the Gulf of California it pushed its delta out ahead of it 
 across the gulf and finally completely divided the gulf, leaving an inland sea, which 
 subsequently dried up and left the Imperial Valley and the Coachella Valley. Then 
 at long intervals apart it continued to flow first into the Imperial Valley and then 
 backing into the Gulf of California. This must have continued for many centuries 
 because the silt in Imperial Valley is over 600 feet deep, showing that it has been 
 carried in there in great quantities and over long periods of time. 
 
 The river now is trying to break back into the Imperial Valley. It did break 
 through in 1905-6. Its break into Bee River in 1908-9 was another effort. Xext 
 it directly attacked our levee along Volcano Lake. It kept building up its bed 
 alongside the levee forcing us to keep raising the levee. The river built the ground 
 up south of the levee 8 to 10 feet in the last 10 years. It is an engineering impos- 
 sibility to raise our dirt levee much higher. In flood season all that country south 
 of our levee, about 20 miles by 20 miles, is covered by a vast expanse of water, all * 
 pressing against the levee seeking for a weak point through which it can break. And * 
 if it does break with all this great volume of water back of it, it will be an entirely 
 problem from what it was when the river broke in 1905 and the entire flow ran 
 into the Imperial Valley for nearly a year. In 1905 there was only the current
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 15 
 
 running water of the river. Now, if it breaks at Volcano Lake levee there will be 
 not only the current running water of the river but in addition an accumulation 
 piled up there for miles behind the levee. 
 
 There is the menace of the thing. The normal land, on the north side of the Vol- 
 cano Lake levee, toward Imperial Valley, is 32 feet above sea level; on the south side, 
 toward the river, it is 40 feet. In case of a break this great volume of water would 
 start off with the impetus given it by this 8-foot fall. 
 
 Fortunately we have found a temporary expediency which will relieve the situation 
 somewhat for a year or two. Our engineers recently found a depression between the 
 old river channel and the one where it is running now; an old watercourse called the 
 Pescadero; they found by digging a channel about 4 miles, they could connect 
 this old watercourse with the present channel of the river and divert it to the South 
 away from Imperial Valley and away from our levees. The river to-day, at 110,000 
 second-feet, is going into that cut and through the old watercourse to the Gulf. 
 
 However, that is only a temporary expedient. It is going to save Imperial Valley 
 for the time being. But it is just a question of time and a short time at that when the 
 silt flowing into that depression will fill it up, as it has filled up everything the river has 
 run into; and we will then have the river back where it was before, with this additional 
 height to jump off from when it does jump into Imperial Valley. The river, according 
 to the report that is now before you, carries an average of 113,000 acre-feet of silt per 
 year. It is not a difficult engineering problem to estimate that capacity and deter- 
 mine how long it will take to fill it up and be back where it was before. 
 
 So that you see it is a race against time as to whether you can construct a storage 
 dam and reservoir which will control the flood waters of the river before the river 
 fills up this depression. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. It will always require the maintenance of your railroad and your dam 
 there, will it not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes; some levee system will have to be maintained. You know that 
 country between Boulder Canyon and our country has a desert climate; it does not 
 rain very often, but when it does, it rains in torrents, and comes down in cloudbursts. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. What do the engineers propose to do with that silt of which 
 you have spoken? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Well, suppose nothing was done at all with it, that dam would take 
 care of the silt for nearly three centuries, according to the estimate of the Reclamation 
 Service. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. At what height is this dam supposed to be built? 
 
 Mr. SWING. At the capacity of 31.000.000 acre-feet some 600 feet high. 
 
 This proposition to develop the Colorado River as a unified project, of which Boulder 
 Canyon Dam is only the first unit, offers to the American people the greatest con- 
 structive project that has been presented to them for many years. This river, begin- 
 ning, as it does, some 12,000 or 13,000 feet above sea level, is a river at 8,000 feet 
 above sea level; for half of its distance it is 4,000 feet above sea level, running through 
 grand canyons and baby grand canyons and narrow gorges, where nature has already 
 prepared sites for dams; it seems to me it offers a wonderful opportunity for develop- 
 ment as a national asset. 
 
 Here we have, year after year, millions of acre-feet of water running to waste, and a 
 menace to life and property while it is running to waste; and let me say just here what 
 will be emphasized by Senator Evans when he addresses the committee: 
 
 The river, right at this time, is running into Palo Verde not simply overflowing 
 its banks: the river is running into Palo Verde now, and it has flooded three towns 
 and inundated 30,000 acres of land, and in the opinion of those who know, we think 
 the river has adopted that valley for its future watercourse. 
 
 Now. it is attacking Palo Verde this year; it may be Yuma next year, or it may bo 
 the Imperial Valley the year after. This river, because of its peculiar physical 
 characteristics, offers the wonderful opportunity of affording a three-in-one project; 
 flood control, power development, and conservation of the water for reclamation, all 
 resulting from one structure. 
 
 The Mississippi River, on which this Government has spent $116,000,000 under the 
 Mississippi Flood Control Commission and I offer no criticism; I think it is the right 
 thing for the Government to do will not return one dollar of that SI 10.000,000 to the 
 Treasury of the United States, except in the added prosperity, and safety of our citizens. 
 That is probably the only way you can handle the floods on the bfiaauBippi. But here 
 on the Colorado you can absolutely control the flood situation by building a data of this 
 kind, and get back your money through the sale of power which can be developed 
 there. 
 
 I will file with the committee in a few days a letter emphasizing what this power 
 development means to the mining interests of Arizona. Nevada, and Utah. That 
 
 1316 22 PT 1 2
 
 16 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 country contains some of the greatest mineral deposits in America. Many of them 
 are low-grade ores, but with a great quantity of cheap power to reduce and transport 
 tlvm you can make the mining proiitable all through there. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. What iield in Utah will be reached by your power scheme? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I have not gone into that. I will file a letter on that subject. At the 
 present time it would only be the lower part of that State that could be reached. But 
 with the improvements that they are making in electrical transmission. Mr. Hoover 
 has stated that he believes in the near future it will be practicable to transmit power 
 commercially 1,000 miles, where to-day it is only being transmitted 500 miles. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. That is "manaiia" again. 
 
 Mr. SWIM;. Well, take the history of electrical development, and how it has moved 
 up; it started at 125 volts; it has crept up year by year until now they are sending 
 220,000 volts commercially, and in the laboratories tests made this last year they have 
 sent a voltage of a million. I do not call it ' ' manaiia " ; I call it to-day. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In addition to the power possibilities, would not a great deal of the 
 expense of construction and maintenance of the project be returned by irrigation of 
 the lands? 
 
 Mr. SWIXG. Yes. This land to-day is worthless 
 
 Mr. RAKER (interposing). How much did they figure that this land could stand 
 that would be brought under the system how much per acre, I mean? 
 
 Mr. SWING. The report provides that the lands shall pay for all irrigation works; 
 the dam itself, it is estimated, can be paid for by the power. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I know: but does not the report make some estimate as to the amount 
 per acre that the land ought to pay. or would be justified in paying, if it is made 
 profitable to cultivate and farm it? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I have not seen that estimate. Land in our country, where there is a 
 long growing period of 11 months, will stand a pretty good charge. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Let me say to Judge Raker that there is no irrigable land in the 
 lower Colorado River valley with an adequate water supply that is not worth at least 
 $200 per acre from that up. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What I am trying to get at is how much the land would be justified 
 in paying. If they have made an estimate of 2,000,000 acres of land to be covered by 
 the project. 60 per cent of which is in the United States, I want to find out what each 
 acre of that land could properly be compelled to pay toward the construction of the 
 dam. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. That depends on what crops the land can produce, which fixes its 
 value. When I say to you that there is no land irrigable from the lower Colorado River 
 which would not be worth at least $200 an acre, you can readily determine what it 
 could pay for an adequate water supply. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And it is now worthless? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Without irrigation, it is worthless. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Will you point to the dam on that map on the wall? 
 
 Mr. SWIXG. I think this is Boulder Canyon [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But that does not show the dam. 
 
 Mr. SWING. There is a mark there [indicating on the map]. There is a continuation 
 of Boulder Canyon called Black Canyon; and the sites are being prospected along there 
 [indicating]. It is very likely that the extension of Boulder Canyon, known as Black 
 Canyon, will contain the most feasible dam site. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But in addition to that, where the map shows the watershed outlined 
 in blue, you have not any outline as to the territory that the reservoir would cover, 
 have you? 
 
 Mr. SWIXG. If you will look at these pictures [indicating pictures on wall], you will 
 see; these pictures were taken by the engineers and myself some distance up the 
 mountain 
 
 Mr. RAKER (interposing). Then you have been down that canyon and wrote the 
 recent article on ; 'The marvellous canyon"? 
 
 Mr. SWIXG. Yes; I have been there. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I have read of that; that was a dangerous trip. 
 
 Mr. SWIXG. This picture [indicating] shows a view looking down the river into 
 Boulder Canyon Gorge. It is about 300 feet across at the water, with the solid granite 
 walls of the canyon rising 2,000 feet high, at an angle of about 80. We then turned 
 the camera around on its tripod upstream. This [indicating] shows the reservoir site, 
 one of the finest in the United States. It is estimated that the dam will back water 
 40 miles up the Colorado and 30 miles up the Virgin River, which joins the Colorado a 
 few miles above the dam site. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Will you state for the benefit of the committee the height of that pro- 
 posed dam? You have two or three levels estimated for?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 17 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes: that is shown in the report. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But can you not indicate it on that map so that it can be visualized? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I can not show it on the map, but it can be found at page 21 of the 
 report. 
 
 Now, just a few more comments while I am on the subject of power. I received 
 a few months ago and I think all of you did a report from Mr. George Otis Smith, 
 the Director of the Geological Survey 
 
 Mr. RAKER : inter posing). You did not quite answer my question. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I beg your pardon. What is it? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I mean, you have the length of the dam and the height, and you have 
 the watershed on that map, and the location of your dam; but you have not marked 
 on the map the territory that the reservoir would cover just to visualize it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I can not show it on that map. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You can not do it now; but if you could have that map changed to 
 show it, that would be valuable to the committee. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. That dam simply fills the gorge. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Of course, the dam fills the gorge; but he wanted shown on the map 
 the extent of the territory the reservoir would cover. 
 
 Mr. HA YUEN. The area of the reservoir can not be accurately shown on a map of 
 that scale, which comprises parts of seven States; but if you will examine the Davis 
 report you will find detailed maps which show the capacity of 10 various proposed 
 reservoirs. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Let me say this, because I have utilized all of my time: The Geological 
 Survey have gotten out a report which, as I read it, says this: That if these three 
 factors are constant, the present known oil supply in America, the present quantity 
 of consumption in America, and the present importation of oil from foreign fields 
 if these three factors remain constant for a period of 20 years, the total oil supply of 
 America will be exhausted. 
 
 I think that is the most startling statement that can possibly be made as to our 
 future. It means that we must begin at once to find a substitute for and a supple- 
 ment to oil, or this country is soing to suffer greatly. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In other words. Judge Swing, this Boulder Canyon Dam and the 
 results coming from it, not only from irrigation, but from electric power and energy, 
 as to these great Western States, has about the same relation to them as Muscle Shoals 
 has to the southern part of the United States? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think we feel as keenly about this in the Southwest as they do about 
 Muscle Shoals in the South; that it will be one of the greatest benefits to the country. 
 
 This is only one unit of the development that is proposed. Secretary Hoover 
 speaks of 10 dams, beginning here [indicating on map] and going up the stream, as 
 the complete Colorado River project. 
 
 And I want to speak for the complete project. I am not here for just one propo- 
 sition. I honestly believe that this project, the completed project of the Colorado 
 River, will be one of the most profitable assets and resources that this country could 
 possibly develop. I think the returns that it would brine: to the American people 
 would be many times greater than the returns from the Panama Canal, as .great as 
 that is. That was built for the world. The citizens along the coast line get the benefit 
 of that. But this project, in returns to the American people, will be many times 
 greater. 
 
 I think it has got to be developed as a comprehensive whole. I can no more think 
 of the Government leasing out different segments of this river to independent and 
 possibly hostile operating concerns one for irrigation, and another for power develop- 
 ment, each one running his part of it in his own way and for his own purposes and his 
 own gain in disregard of the effect on the rest of the river than I can think of taking 
 a great transcontinental railroad line, dividing it up into segments and leasing them 
 to independent operating companies, and then trying to run transcontinental trains 
 through from coast to coast without having wrecks on every mile. of the road. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. There are now many applications from organizations and institutions 
 for these sites in piecemeal, are there not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. And nothing could be a greater mistake to the country, in looking 
 to the future, than to have these reservoirs developed in a hit or miss, haphazard 
 wav. and possibly at cross purposes with each other; because what is done on one part 
 of the river directly affects every other part of the river above and below it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Your judgment is, from your study of this subject, that all of these 
 should be disallowed and the matter should be handled and developed and improved 
 by the Government as one project? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. I say the Government, because I think it is the only agency that 
 can coordinate the various interests and activities and develop the various properties
 
 18 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 on this river and impartially distribute the benefits. The Government would develop 
 the project for the benefit of its citizens, and those citizens living in the States adjoin- 
 ing the river would, of course, yet the greater direct return from the development. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I think we agree as to that. But I want to ask you one ques- 
 tion: Does not that contemplate, however, the final determination of the commission 
 now working upon the question of allocating those waters? 
 
 Mr. S \vi\r;. I hope the Colorado River Commission will arrive, and speedily arrive, t] 
 at an agreement. The results of the six meetings that have thus far been held have ^ 
 been very discouraging. It seems to be almost impossible for them to reach an agree- 
 ment. If they ever reach an agreement. I should be very glad to see that agreement 
 v ritten right into this bill. But Imperial Valley can not wait an indeterminate 
 length of time for an agreement by the commission any more than they can wait an 
 indeterminate length of time for Mexico to enter into a treaty. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Would not that be a very strong argument for this commission 
 to definitely determine whether it is going to decide anything or not? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes; I agree with you as to that. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I do not hesitate to say to you that I heartily agree with your 
 general proposition, but I want to know how these waters are going to be allocated". 
 
 Mr. SWING. In this bill, I left that out, because, as I say, when they reach an agree- 
 ment their agreement can be embodied into this legislation; but as to the power, this 
 bill says, "Provided, That the Secretary of the Interior shall hold hearings and shall 
 allocate the power privileges among the states according to their equitable rights and 
 interests therein." 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I will say. Judge Swing, that it seems to me that you have 
 made out a case this morning sufficient to show that it is highly important and neces- 
 sary that this commission should finish up its work and make a final report. 
 
 Mr. SWING. No man would say "Amen" to that louder or more earnestly than I 
 would. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I do not see why a commission should fool around and waste 
 time for four or five years, in a matter of this importance, as they usually do. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Why, if a ship like the Lusitania with 1.500 people on board were to 
 send in an S. O. S. that it was sinking, you know that our Government would stop 
 every activity if necessary in order to afford it relief. And yet here in Imperial Valley 
 you have 50,000 people who are in imminent danger 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD (interposing). I do not know how many States I can speak for 
 in this matter. We are anxious to join with you; but I can say for one of the States, 
 that we want to know where we will come out as to the upper waters of the river; 
 and when we can find out where we will come out on the matter, we will join you 
 shoulder to shoulder. 
 
 Mr. SWING. This scheme has wonderful possibilities if it is carried out; there is not 
 a man who has studied the Colorado River that has not been carried away with the pos- 
 sibilities that it offers. When Franklin K. Lane came in as Secretary of the Interior, 
 he knew the Colorado River merely as a stream that had to be crossed on the way from 
 the East to the West. Eastern people know very little about the Colorado River, 
 because the channels of trade and travel do not run parallel to it; they bisect it. 
 But before Mr. Lane left office, he would have given anything in his power to have 
 been able to say that the development of the Colorado River was started by him. 
 And the same thing is true of Secretary Fall. Each man who studies into the matter 
 soon comes to see that here is a gold mine awaiting development. Secretary Hoover 
 says it will be the most talked of project in America within the next two years. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is the matter with the commission that they do not get out their 
 report? Or I will put it this way: What is the fact that is holding their report up? 
 I think that is the better way to put it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. In those cases you have to determine water rights; and you know as 
 well as I do that that is one of the most complicated subjects there is to handle even by 
 trained jurists. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well, why do they not, through our State Department, adjust this 
 other question of international water rights, so that \ve will have that cleaned up and 
 be able to put it through without complications? 
 
 Mr. SWIM;. I will be glad to see that done. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Permit rue to make it plain to the committee that I do not want to see 
 any agreement or treaty made with Mexico until we have settled our own troubles 
 in the United States. We must first know the ultimate possibilities, so far as irrigation 
 is concerned, within the United States. All of the facts should be adequately deter- 
 mined before Congress or the American Government concedes any water rights to any / 
 foreign country.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 19 
 
 Mr. SWING. I agree with you. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Mexico should be made to wait, and can very well be made to wait. 
 The longer the Mexicans are compelled to wait and to observe that the waters of the 
 Colorado River are being applied to beneficial uses within the United States, the more 
 reasonable they will be in dealing with our Government. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You do not get my point. We have the territory and we have the 
 water and we should push the project. But the point is that while we are adjusting 
 pur complications in our own States, we have a complication below with Mexico that 
 it seems to me can well be adjusted. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. There is no need for haste in arriving at any such adjustment with 
 Mexico. I am convinced, as any one who has studied the facts and the law must 
 be, that there is no legal obligation on the part of the United States to give one drop 
 of water to Mexico, for which a beneficial use can be found within the United States. 
 Let us start out on that basis. We may ultimately treat with Mexico; but so far as 
 I am concerned, I shall oppose any kind of agreement recognizing any kind of a 
 Mexican water right in the Colorado River until it is definitely and finally determined 
 that there is a surplus of water in that stream for which there is no possible use in the 
 United States. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Your theory is that we have absolute control of all of that water, and 
 can dam it up and take it away, and do as we please with it? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. There is no doubt about that. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. You think the States should first settle their rights? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Yes. And that is why the Colorado River Commission was estab- 
 lished by Congress and the seven States of the Colorado River basin. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. That is what I say. 
 
 Mr. SWING. In conclusion may I say that I hope the committee will have such 
 hearings as are necessary to inform itself on this proposition and enable it to determine 
 what in its opinion is the broad and statesmanlike policy to pursue in this matter; 
 and that then it will get busy and help us to get this started. 
 
 When we were here in 1919 you sent us away to await the determination of this board 
 of inquiry which was appointed under the Kinkaid bill which this committee 
 reported to the House and had passed by Congress. Under that law the report of that 
 commission was prepared. The Government appropriated $20,000 for its expenses. 
 The Imperial Irrigation District was supposed to match that, dollar for dollar. Instead 
 we appropriated $40,000 to begin with. Then we appropriated $30,000 additional, 
 making $70,000; and we have recently appropriated $30,000 more, making a total of 
 $100,000 advanced by Imperial Valley to enable the Government officials to make as 
 exhaustive an investigation as they cared to make. We are now back here again 
 at the earliest possible moment after the official report was completed to represent 
 this matter to you; and this report of the Secretary of the Interior we approve in the 
 main, and think it is a step in the right direction. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. If we have to wait for this commission to determine the water rights 
 when can we go ahead with any idea of accomplishing something? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Those commissioners could get together and reach an agreement within 
 30 or 60 days. Whether they will do that or not I do not know. That was the hope 
 that we had in starting it that, instead of having to have cases go through the district 
 court, the circuit court of appeals, and the supreme court, and then back again and 
 not for one community alone, but for 150 communities as each community litigated 
 its water rights with its neighbor and with the rest of the 149, through a period of 50 
 years, with the resulting waste of time and money and holding back the development 
 of the country, these men on this commission, honest men, citizens, neighbors, 
 and representatives of the people who will derive the greatest benefit by having the 
 Government do this work, would get together and say, "Let us cut out the red tape; 
 let us cut out the delay and loss of time in getting the thing started; and let us agree 
 on this thing as friends and neighbors and men. Let us enter into an agreement and 
 get this thing started, so that in our day and age, and while we are still alive, we can 
 see some of the many benefits returned to our country. " 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. Yes; but if we have to wait until they get through, we may have to 
 wait a long time. 
 
 Mr. SwiNc;. Well, I will say that we in the Imperial Valley and the people of the 
 Lower Colorado River can not wait. As I said before, I will say very earnestly again, 
 that this is a race against time. Here is this little depression that can take care of that 
 silt for four or five years. After the water that will again back up onto Imperial 
 Valley, as it did in 1905 and 190G; and when it does there will be a much grea lei- 
 flood and a much greater disaster than there was before. So that it is a race against 
 time to get this dam started.
 
 20 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO J1IYKK BASIN. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Let me ask you this question: As I said a moment ago, I 
 represent a State that is anxious to cooperate. It is a State, however, that has a 
 great many fertile acres that it is possible to reclaim from this river and its tributa- 
 ries. Now, do you not think that it is highly important, in order to solve this ques- 
 tion, that some decision be made as to the allocation of those waters? 
 
 You say that you can not wait down in your country. I do not care to take the SL 
 time of the committee to discuss that now. But if you go ahead with this project U 
 and allow this commission simply to hold back and do nothing, and no agreement is 
 reached as between the States, then you may foreclose States having thousands of 
 acres up the river, which would be affected from future development, and I say that 
 they can not afford to sit still and see a decree entered against them without protest. 
 Now, what we want to do is to avoid the protest. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think you and Mr. Arentx and Mr. Montoya and Mr. Hayden and I 
 could sit here and reach a reasonable agreement in short order. But if you have 
 read the hearings of the commission carefully. I think you will not blame the failure 
 to reach an agreement upon the representatives from California. New Mexico, Arizona, 
 or Nevada. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. I am not protesting or complaining; I am simply stating our 
 attitude. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I will say that the delay is not due to the position taken or the conten- 
 tions made by the representatives from Arizona, California, Nevada, or New Mexico. 
 There were people on that commission, however, who did not want to reach an agree- 
 ment. If this committee will take action on my bill, it will do more than anything 
 else to hurry an agreement of the Colorado River Commission. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. I do not want to terminate the hearing this morning abruptly; but 
 on account of matters that will come up in the House to-day, in which several members 
 of the committee are concerned, it will be necessary to adjourn the meeting. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes; I came here merely to introduce this delegation to the commit- 
 tee. It was intended that they should do the talking, instead of which I have taken 
 all the time. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. \Ve will adjourn until 10.30 o'clock to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Thank you for the opportunity. 
 
 (Thereupon, at 12 o'clock noon, the committee adjourned until Fridav, June 16. 
 1922, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS, 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 Friday, June 16, 1922. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. M. P. Kinkaid (chairman) presiding. 
 The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen of the committee, we have before us to-day Director 
 Davis, of the Reclamation Service, and I take it we are now ready to hear him. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. ARTHUR P. DAVIS, DIRECTOR RECLAMATION 
 
 SERVICE. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, on the recommendation of this committee the Congress 
 passed an act in 1920, approved on May 18 of that year, ' ' To provide for an examination 
 and report on the condition and possible irrigation development of the Imperial Valley 
 in California." 
 
 The report thus called for by Congress lias been recently printed and is in the hands 
 of the committee. In pursuance of the idea which was back of that act of Congress 
 and of the recommendations of the report, this bill, H. R. 11449, has been introduced, 
 and a report has been received from the Secretary of the Interior recommending, 
 with minor amendments, that it do pa-^. 
 
 The report is e-^ontially that of Secretary Fall, personally. Recommendations 
 were made by the Reclamation Service but were modified in the Secretary's office 
 and very carefully gone over by him in person and modified to a considerable extent, 
 and in my judgment improved. The legislation for currying out the recommenda- 
 tions of this report consists, in the main, in the recommendation for the building 
 of a canal to irrigate the high lands and serve the low lands also, of the Imperial 
 Valley, diverted at the Laguna Dam about 12 miles above the city of Yurna. be- 
 tween southern Arizona and California: also the constni'-iion of a reservoir in the 
 neighborhood of Boulder Canyon near Las Vegas, Nev., which would have a capacity /" 
 large enough to conserve and regulate the waters of the Colorado River, The. pri- 
 mary purpose of that reservoir is to control the waters and bring to an end, so far as 
 that may do so, the menace to the Imperial Valley. That menace is one that has been 
 standing and has been growing for many years.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 21 
 
 The Colorado River drains a very large basin about 244,000 square miles. Through 
 the upper part the precipitation is largely in the form of snow and comes off in the 
 spring and early summer and forms a very large stream in the process always. Through 
 the middle portion the river and its tributaries flow through canyons that they have 
 eroded and are still eroding in the course toward the sea. In that course the river 
 has a very large fall and the erosive power is very great. With sand cut loose from 
 the rock -the water using that sand as a tool grinds away on the remaining rock and 
 accumulates more and more of these tools and as it passes through the canyon be- 
 comes a stream very heavily ladened with sediment. 
 
 At the southern line of Nevada, where it is proposed to build a reservoir, it is 
 estimated from observations that the river discharges an average amount of over 
 80,000 acre-feet of sediment annually. The annual discharge of the river at that 
 point will average about 17,500,000 acre-feet, a portion of which is lost by evapora- 
 tion and seepage before it reaches Laguna Dam. 
 
 The problems of this river are largely complicated by the irregular flow. The 
 water is used to some extent for irrigation in the upper basin; about 1,500,000 acres 
 are irrigated in that region, and the balance flows down through the canyon. In 
 some parts of the basin all of the low water flow is already appropriated and diverted. 
 That is true of many of the smaller tributaries and of Grand River, the largest tribu- 
 tary, in the neighborhood of Grand Junction, Colo., but the river has many tribu- 
 taries below those points and discharges large quantities of water in the flood season 
 not now appropriated or used in any way. .So that with the deduction that irriga- 
 tion makes in the upper basin, the discharge at Boulder Canyon will average about 
 17,500,000 acre-feet per annum. This comes largely in the spring and earL summer 
 months; the rest of the year, about eight months, is mainly seasons of low water. 
 The low water flow is diverted in the neighborhood of the Mexican line for the irriga- 
 tion of Imperial Valley and at Laguna Dam for the irrigation of the Yuma project 
 and in extreme low years, the low water flow is all diverted for those purposes and 
 there have been slight, although not disastrous, shortages of water once or twice it, 
 their history, and as the irrigation grows, of course, that is likely to be intensified, 
 and no very large expansion of irrigation in the Imperial Valley or any other part 
 of the lower stream is possible without the storage of water for irrigation. Thus, 
 regulation for storage constitutes a secondary but very important function of the 
 storage that is proposed. 
 
 In the investigations that have been in progress in this river basin through the 
 last 25 years, a great deal of information has been compiled and stream measure- 
 ments have been made at various points. Irrigation has been growing and the infor- 
 mation has been accumulating. We have investigated many irrigation projects in 
 all of the States which are drained by this river, seven in number. In Wyoming there 
 are possibilities of irrigation and water storage. There are some in Utah and a still 
 larger number in Colorado. There are some in New Mexico, and Arizona can use a 
 large portion of the waters of the tributaries of the Colorado when they are developed. 
 There is also some use possible in southern Nevada, although only a small area is 
 drained and that is relatively arid in character. But the largest area which can be 
 served from the Colorado River is in California. There are some small valleys, but 
 the Imperial Valley is the bulk of the irrigation possible in that State from the Colorado 
 River. 
 
 As irrigation grows in the upper basin and throughout the basin, the water supply 
 will be more or less consumed, and if that growth continues the present appropriations 
 of water on the lower river would be embarrassed and would be interfered with, 
 unless some means were taken to interfere with the development above, and this 
 problem really brought to the engineers investigating this project the fact that while 
 there is an abundance of water in the Colorado River basin, if properly conserved, 
 to serve all the lands that can be feasibly and economically reached and served from 
 that river, that is not true unless the river is properly regulated and conserved, and 
 with the recognition of the prior right of early appropriators to the water which they 
 appropriate, now recognized by all of the seven States which this river drains, and also 
 by the Supreme Court of the United States, as being the ruling law on this subject, 
 the strict enforcement of which would prevent any further development in the upper 
 basin during the low-water season. If the priorities already acquired on the lower river 
 were strictly enforced they would interfere with any further development of the low- 
 water flow in the upper basin; and to prevent that interference and permit the full 
 development of the States above, six of which can utilize the tributaries of the ( 'olorado 
 River all of them can except California to prevent interference with their develop- 
 ment, it is necessary to conserve the waters of the Colorado River and regulate it so 
 that the further diversion of the low-water flow in the upper basin will not interfere 
 either with present irrigation or with further development in the lower basin.
 
 22 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask you a question there, Mr. Davis? 
 Mr. DAVIS. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Would it be practicable to make a brief statement here of the lower 
 rights that have been developed that would interfere with the upper rights, stating 
 what they were and the amount of each, and under what right they arose. 
 Mr. DAVIS. The figures on that 
 
 Mr. LITTLE (interposing). I did not mean for you to do that just now. fl 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I can put that in the record at this point. The principal developments V 
 in the lower basin are the Imperial Valley and the Yuma project and some small 
 diversions above those points, but those two are the main ones. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. That is not it. What I wanted to get was a statement of what settled, 
 legal right they had that gave them a priority, and how great the amount was. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The priority is due to use, to the present irrigated area which is the 
 best index to the answer to your question, and is about 400,000 acres in the Im- 
 perial Valley irrigation district. 
 Mr. SWING. About 415,000. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. About 415,000 acres in the Imperial irrigation district and about 120,000 
 appropriated, of which about two-thirds has been used, on the Yuma project. 
 Mr. LITTLE. Then there is no statutory provision that would have that effect. 
 Mr. DAVIS. No statutory provision. There are statutory provisions in the individual 
 States that give priority of right and which would apply against any other appropriator 
 in that State. The Supreme Court of -the United States recently handed down a 
 decision sustaining that principle. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Would you be good enough to put that decision in the record? 
 Mr. DAVIS. Certainly. I have not yet received a copy of that decision and it is 
 only rumor as to just what it provides, but I think that is correct. 
 Mr. SWIXG. That was in the case of Wyoming r. Colorado. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I inquired of the clerk of the Supreme Court yesterday who said that 
 the decision would probably be available early next week. I hope that it can be 
 printed in these hearings. 
 
 (NOTE. The Supreme Court decision referred to is printed at the conclusion of Mr. 
 Davia's remarks.) 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Is there any contest between the Yuma project and the Imperial 
 Valley now as to the priorities. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; that was settled by contract a few years ago. The Secretary 
 of the Interior, on behalf of the Yuma project and also of the United States, entered 
 into a contract with the Imperial irrigation district in which a division is made of 
 the waters there definitely. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So that question is settled. 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Where does this contest come from, spoken of yesterday relative to 
 some one serving an injunction upon the Imperial Valley people for putting in this 
 dam which they put in every year to divert the water. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That comes from the Yuma project. That, however, is not a contest 
 over water. It is a fear on the part of the Yuma project that a diversion dam built 
 near the Mexican line, a few miles below Yuma, will imperil that valley by diverting 
 the river into it. It is a dam that is necessary to divert water into the Imperial 
 Canal. That, however, I understand, is in process of settlement. There is a contract 
 entered into by the Imperial irrigation district with the United States, the same one 
 that divided the waters, and that provides that the Imperial irrigation district shall 
 build a high-line canal and take its water from the Laguna Dam, and the contract 
 provides for the right to do that, and for the obligation also. When the water is all 
 taken from the Laguna Dam, which is a dam with rock abutments, so that there is no 
 danger of the river going around it and one which has been in service a long time, 
 then the menace of a diversion below will be removed. That menace would be 
 partly removed by the regulation of the river. 
 
 The Reclamation Service has built a number of projects in the basin of the Colorado 
 River. Two are in the State of Colorado, one taking water from the Gunnison River, 
 a tributary of the Grand River, and one taking water directly from the Grand River, 
 called the Uncompahsre project and the Grand Valley project. There is a project 
 in Utah taking water from the drainage of the Colorado River into the drainage of 
 Utah Lake, and that is known as the Strawberry Valley project. There is a project 
 also on the drainage of the Colorado in Arizona, storing water in the Roosevelt Reser- 
 voir on Salt River for use in the Salt River Valley, which is a tributary of the Colorado. ,, 
 There are other projects that have been investigated, but before and after the adoption / 
 of these projects that have been built and show that there is a considerable expansion 
 of irrigation still possible, there being a possibility of building that irrigation up to
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 23 
 
 about 4,000,000 acres in the total, instead of 1,500,000 acres. In order to do that it 
 is necessary to build reservoirs, and in investigating this whole problem investiga- 
 tions have been made as to the storage of water in all promising places in the entire 
 basin, and it has been found that storage reservoirs of large capacity and feasible of 
 construction at moderate cost can be built on Grand River, the lowest one being at 
 Dewey and the upper one being known as the Kremmling Reservoir. Reservoirs 
 are also possible and feasible on the Green River. The one that seems to be the most 
 promising at the present time is in Flaming Gorge, just south of the Wyoming line. 
 Small reservoirs can be provided on the tributaries for regulating the water for use 
 in Wyoming. 
 
 The question has been studied whether or not the storage of water for the lower 
 river could be feasibly and properly accomplished in the upper basin, and whether 
 or not it' would solve the problems as well as below. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I am interested in that phase of the Colorado River problem, and I 
 would like to have you elaborate on it. Prof. G. E. P. Smith, an irrigation engineer 
 connected with the College of Agriculture of the University of Arizona, stated not 
 long ago that in his opinion the quickest way to regulate the floods of the Colorado 
 River for the protection of the Imperial Valley is to build the Flaming Gorge Reservoir 
 and to utilize the Dewey Reservoir site which you have just mentioned. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. Mr. Chairman, may I hang one of the maps which I brought 
 with me? 
 
 I wanted this map [indicating] because it shows the reservoir sites which have been 
 investigated in the basin. They are marked in red and show vividly. The map 
 shows that there are possibilities on the upper tributaries of the Colorado River for 
 storage. The Flaming Gorge site, which I mentioned, is in southern Wyoming, the 
 south end of the reservoir being just south of the Wyoming-Utah line. That is the best 
 site and is a very feasible site, with a large water supply; and the best one on the 
 Grand River for the purpose of regulating the water is at the Dewey site in eastern 
 Utah near the Colorado line. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Those are the two reservoirs on the headwaters that Professor Smith 
 has recommended. He said that there would be no engineering difficulties, nothing 
 new or experimental in their construction, that the dams would not be any larger 
 than the Roosevelt Dam and that the work could begin right away, which would give 
 protection to the Imperial Valley in a much less period of time than to wait for the 
 construction of the great dam at Boulder Canyon. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I am well acquainted with Professor Smith, and he is a very able and 
 intelligent gentleman and on most subjects I agree with him. It is true that those 
 two reservoir sites have been thoroughly tested, the foundation has been explored 
 and they are both feasible and relatively reasonable in cost. They intercept about 
 three-fourths of the flow of the Colorado River and approximately one-fourth of the 
 drainage area. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Would they simply be used as storage reservoirs for water to 
 be used lower down or is there any irrigation project in that locality? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Flaming Gorge could be used on lands in Utah and Colorado; Dewey 
 could not. The Dewey site on the Grand River is below any irrigable lands in that 
 basin and it would be useful only for regulating the river through and below the 
 canyon. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Is there enough water in tliis water basin to irrigate all the 
 lands to which water could be applied north of Bowlder Canyon and still have sufficient 
 to take care of the lands in the Imperial Valley and adjacent lands? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; if you confine that to lands which can be feasibly reached 
 and with some to spare. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Then why are there objections to this project on the part oi 
 some of the people in Colorado and elsewhere? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Well, there are three reasons why these two sites do not solve the ques- 
 tion that I speak of. In the first place, they have not adequate capacity. They are 
 smaller than is necessary. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Where is the Glen Canyon? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. A little lower down there you will find the dam site, in northern 
 Arizona. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That covers a very large territory, does it not? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. The reservoirs spoken of, Flaming Gorge and Dewey, if built, 
 would regulate the main flow of the water in a manner adequate for irrigation and for 
 power through the Boulder Canyon or in any part of the Grand Canyon region; that is, 
 any point below the junction of the Green and the Grand Rivers. They would not, 
 of course, intercept all of the water and would not make as large a quantity available 
 for power, but would make available a sufficient quantity to satisfy irrigation needs.
 
 24 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER I'.ASIX. 
 
 The Flaming Gorge Reservoir is the most valuable and promising site at which to 
 develop power for use in that region and is now desired for the development of power for 
 use in Salt Lake City and in the mining regions of Utah. If it were built for irrigation 
 or flood-control purposes, in the lower basin, it could not, of course, be used in the 
 method necessary for the development of power. The same thing is true of its use 
 for the development of irrigation in the upper basin, and it can be used for that pur- 
 pose, and those two uses, power and irrigation, up there, are so antagonistic to the 
 uses of the valley below, for which it would be confined to a draft of about three 
 months, and that at a different part of the year from what it would be used above, that 
 the use of reservoirs in either of those places for the benefit of the valley below would 
 destroy large resources of the upper States. That is the main objection. 
 
 The other objections are that they do not solve the problem. While they intercept 
 about three-fourths of the actual flow of water, it is the regular flow from the mountains 
 that comes to them. They do not intercept the flashy flood flows that cause the 
 damage. Three-fourths of the basin or more would be left unintercepted by those 
 two reservoirs, I think nearly four-fifths, and all of it is subject to great floods and a 
 great deal of it to heavy flow at times from the mountains, so that the floods would not 
 be regulated. To illustrate the importance of that, I wish to call attention to the fact 
 that the Gila River in southern Arizona, which has 57,000 square miles of drainage, or 
 about 22 per cent of the entire drainage of the Colorado River, discharges only 
 6 per cent of the water of that basin, but it furnishes flood waves at times which are as 
 great as the maximum flow of the Colorado River itself above the mouth of the Gila. 
 So that in the final regulation of the stream at Yuma and below, it will be necessary 
 to provide a dam on the Gila. The Gila floods, however, are not nearly so menacing 
 to the Imperial Valley as the Colorado, because they are very brief and although th,ey 
 might break the levees and break into the valley they are over in time to allow the 
 break to be repaired at low water, instead of continuing for months at a high water 
 stage like the Colorado River does. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In other words, the flood season on the Gila is not the same as on the 
 Colorado. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That ie true. It floods in the winter and early spring, while the Colorado 
 fleods in the summer. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Let me see if I understand vou correctly. 
 
 Your first objection to the construction of the reservoirs at the Flaming Gorge and 
 Dewey sites is that if they were used for the purpose of regulating the floods so as to 
 protect the Imperial Valley the release of the water would have to be made at such 
 times as to seriously interfere with a constant market for power in Salt Lake or Denver 
 or other cities and towns in that vicinity. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. It would destroy their use for power purposes almost. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. So that the people in the upper section of the Colorado River Basin 
 who are interested in obtaining power feel that it would be better to have the flood 
 waters stored at some other place farther downstream and allow these two dams to be 
 built primarily for power purposes. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. And also for irrigation. Flaming Gorge is of use for irrigation and could 
 be used for both irrigation and power. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Your second objection is that the waters entering these two reservoirs 
 largely come from melting snow which runs off slowly, and that therefore they would 
 not control the flashy floods that are the real menace to the Imperial Valley. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Well, there is a great deal of water that comes at high times, and those 
 reservoirs would contribute to the control of the damaging floods, but they leave 
 more than three-fourths of that basin uncontrolled and on the maximum floods would 
 have but little influence, for two reasons the reservoirs might be discharging at that 
 time as their capacity is not great, and they would not be sufficient to hold all of the 
 water in the basin back, either one of them; but the reasons you have given are the 
 principal ones. In the first place it does not solve the flood problem and in the second 
 place it would destroy resources in the upper States to use the reservoirs for that 
 purpose. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Have you any suggestion to offer as to what additional provisions 
 should be made to meet this other emergency? Are there other places available? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. This map shows that there are two reservoir sites on the main 
 stream of large capacity, one at Glen Canyon, where the river enters Arizona, and one 
 about 300 miles farther down at Boulder Canyon, where the river forms the boundary 
 between Arizona and Nevada. The Boulder Canyon site will hold a little more 
 water for a given height of dam than the Glen Canyon site. It is also below and inter- 
 cepts about 50,000 square miles of drainage area which Glen Canyon does not inter- 
 cept. It is also, of course, much nearer to the necessary market for power on the 
 Pacific coast.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 25 
 
 The report recently issued discusses this question briefly and recommends the 
 construction of the reservoir in Boulder Canyon. Investigations have been made with 
 that in view and are still in progress. We have found one good, feasible dam site 
 but there are numerous places in the canyon where a dam can be built, and it is desir- 
 able to get it at the lowest point in the canyon possible so as to utilize whatever fall 
 is available, because a second dam in the same canyon, of course, would not be a 
 practical proposition, and with that in view we are making additional investigations 
 and the last investigations were made at the point indicated on that map as the dam 
 site in Black Canyon. 
 
 Mr. UAYDEX. Black Canyon is just below Boulder Canyon? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes; it is simply a continuation of Boulder Canyon. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. What funds have you available to continue this engineering investi- 
 gation? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The appropriation bill passed for the Interior Department recently 
 contains an item of 100,000 for carrying on the investigation of the Colorado River. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It is your purpose to use such funds to thoroughly explore every 
 possible site in Boulder and Black Canyons so as to finally determine where the best 
 location is? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. And the farther down the river you could find a feasible site is where 
 you would locate the dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think so. Of course, we have to take many other things into consid- 
 eration the depth to rock and everything of that kind but, other things being equal, 
 it is desirable to locate it as far down the stream as possible. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. You have mentioned the Glen Canyon Reservoir site. If you are at 
 all familiar with the discussion that has been going on in the Southwest, you are 
 aware that the construction of a reservoir at Glen Canyon, near Lee's Ferry, where, 
 I understand, the canyon walls are some 1,300 feet high 
 
 Mr. DAVIS (interposing). So they are at Boulder. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN (continuing.) The plan suggested is that instead of building an ex- 
 pensive stone and concrete dam, as is proposed in your Boulder Canyon report, to 
 place immense charges of dynamite in the upper part of each of the walls of Glen 
 Canyon and blast them down into the river bed so as to make a great rock-fill dam. 
 The canyon, as I understand it, makes a sharp bend there, and the plan would be to 
 thus build this rock-fill dam and then cut through the bend for a spillway and for 
 power development. So many people have written to me in regard to the Glen 
 Canyon Dam that I shall be greatly obliged if you will discuss the possibilities there. 
 Please tell us what investigations the Reclamation Service has made, and whether it 
 is possible to build that kind of a dam so as to control the flood waters of the Colorado 
 River. If you could blast the rock into the Canyon and build a dam in that way, 
 obviously it would be very much cheaper than a structure made of stone and concrete. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I have given a great deal of consideration to that question and have 
 discussed it. The first proposition I ever knew for doing that was for the Boulder 
 Canyon Dam. Our engineers have studied that and I do not agree it would be cheaper 
 to do it. If all the necessary precautions were taken to make that dam safe, it is very 
 doubtful whether it would be cheaper. It is so unprecedented in its attempt that 
 I do not regard it as wise to do it. It is not, however, beyond consideration at the pres- 
 ent time because nothing has been done that might not permit that type of dam to 
 be built, but it is irrelevant to this question because it can be done just as well in 
 Boulder Canyon as it can in Glen Cauoa, because of the high walls. 
 
 Mr. HAVDKN-. If the scheme of blasting rock from the sides of the canyon is feasible 
 at (Jlen Canyon it is just as practicable at Boulder Canyon? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Certainly; nobody has ever mentioned any reason why it would not 
 be, and we considered and estimated for it at Boulder Canyon a year and a half ago 
 and decided upon the other type of dam. 
 
 Mr. HAVDKN. What was the principal engineering reason which led you to that 
 decision? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Safety. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEV. In other words, you believe that a dam of that kind would not stay 
 in the river after the rock is blasted in. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Ye.s. A paper advocating that type of dam has been published in the 
 proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, and I have sent my views on 
 that subject to that society for publication, and they will appear in the next issue of 
 the proceedings, I think. Of course, it is a technical question and others are discussing 
 the matter, and it would hardly be profitable, I think, to undertake that discussion 
 now because, for one thing, both sides are not represented here, and it is a \ cry tech- 
 nical question and it would take a day or two to discuss it.
 
 26 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. What investigations have been made at Glen Canyon to determine the 
 depth to bedrock. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. None. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Have you any funds available to make such an investigation? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Our- present appropriation would be available for that purpose, as 1 
 interpret it. ^ 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. If it is available, would it be adequate to do that work? y 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No, it would not, unless we neglected other work. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. You have $100,000 available that could be expended anywhere on the 
 Colorado River. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Anywhere in the basin: yes. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. As I stated before, there has been such great interest shown in the 
 Glen Canyon dam site that if funds are available it would seem to me to be highly 
 desirable to take a diamond drill and find out how far it is to bedrock there, as one 
 element that would determine its feasibility. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The exploration would be very expensive, because it is a long way 
 from the railroad and from supplies' of any kind, and it would be very expensive to 
 bring in the machinery" and to get the men there and would require a large appropria- 
 tion. I suppose that is the reason it has not been done before, because the power 
 companies have considered it and abandoned it. A survey of the Glen Canyon site 
 was made by the Geological Survey, but the Reclamation Service has made no in- 
 vestigation of that site on the ground, but it has been listed and its capacity known 
 for years and has been included in our list of possible reservoir sites. It. however, 
 leaves 50,000 square miles of drainage above the Boulder Canyon site unintercepted. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. That would be the drainage from the Virgin and the Little Colorado? 
 
 Mr. DAMS. The Little Colorado, the Paria. the Virgin. Grand Wash, Kanab Creek, 
 Diamond Creek, and many other tributaries. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. Would the construction of either one of the proposed dams have 
 any deleterious effect on the Grand Canyon National Park? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo: neither one would have any effect on it at all, because they are 
 both remote from that park. Glen Canyon is a long distance above the park. As 
 you will see, the park is colored there in purple. The Boulder Canyon is a long 
 distance below it. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. Perhaps 150 miles. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. There are two good power sites which should be developed 
 between Boulder Canyon and the Grand Canyon Park that would not interfere with 
 it at all, and there is one good one between Glen Canyon and the Grand Canyon Park 
 that would not touch it at all. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. You have reference to the Diamond Creek power site? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Diamond Creek is one and then there is room for another between 
 that and Boulder Canyon. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. If the application made by James B. Girand, of Phoenix, for the 
 Diamond Creek site, now pending before the Federal Power Commission was allowed, 
 would it in any engineering way interfere with the construction of the Boulder Canvon 
 Dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I understand the Federal Power Commission has determined not to 
 grant any water power applications on the stream pending action by the Colorado 
 River Commission looking to an equitable distribution of its waters between the 
 seven States interested. Also that no applications will be approved pending the 
 determination of the question as to whether the granting of any such applications 
 would interfere with any Government dams. Has there been any especial objection 
 made to granting the Girand application by reason of any interference in any way 
 with the Boulder Canyon dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo; in a physical sense it would not interfere at all. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. The only possible interference, then, would be that the development 
 of power at Diamond Creek would supply a market for power which otherwise might 
 be supplied from the Boulder Canyon dam. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS-. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. The people in my State. I will say very frankly to the committee, are 
 immensely interested in the possibilities of the development of power on the Colorado 
 River. We have no oil field of any kind in Arizona and no large coal field has been 
 developed. We are compelled to import all of our fuel oil either from California or 
 Texas and our coal from Colorado or Xew Mexico. The mining industry in Arizona s~ 
 is operating under high costs with tremendous charges for transportation to move out * 
 the copper. If hydroelectric power is produced on the Colorado River, the mines of 
 Arizona will be immediate consumers of large quantities of it.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 27 
 
 A secondary market for this power, which I believe will in time be very great, 
 would be the use of electric power to develop water by pumping for the irrigation 
 of lands within the State. The area of land that can be irrigated in Arizona by gravity 
 is less than in California, as Director Davis has stated. Therefore, the people of Ari- 
 zona have an immediate interest in the power question. They are anxious to have 
 cheap power made available as soon as possible. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Mr. Chairman, may I ask a question? 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. As I understand it. there are no flood -control possibilities to speak of in 
 connection with the proposed Diamond Creek dam. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No; the entire canyon between the two sites is a narrow canyon with 
 practically no storage capacity. 
 
 Mr. SWING. It is virtually a pure power proposition. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Purely. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Now, if Diamond Creek dam was built and then we built Boulder 
 Canyon dam, so far as you can see now or in the near future, is there a market for 
 the power from both dams? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Well, that is looking into the fxiture in a way that none of xis is entirely 
 competent to do. 
 
 Mr. SWING. The market is not sufficient for both dams now. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is true. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Davis, if the Government is going in there to build the Boulder 
 Canyon dam or the Glen Canyon dam with the power possibilities of both, would 
 it be wise to permit private individuals to go in there in advance and develop power 
 plants while the Government was proceeding to develop the whole project? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think not. That brings me to a question that I was intending to touch 
 upon. The first section of this bill declares a policy on the part of the Government. 
 The interrelation of the power possibilities and of the control of floods and of irriga- 
 tion on that river are so intimate that any conflict of authority is bound to lead to 
 waste and maybe danger. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Not only that, but what is in my mind is that if we sre starting in to 
 develop that whole country, if we allow private individuals in the meantime to take 
 up the choice sites and in addition to that take the market, are not Congress and the 
 people going to hestitate a good deal about making the general development? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think so; yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In your opinion, if Congress was to take the necessary steps to author- 
 ize you to commence construction at the Boulder Canyon dam site, do you believe that 
 you_ would have power available for the State of Arizona as quickly as it would be 
 available if it were developed by private enterprise at some other site? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think we could. There are some advantages in each case and it is a 
 close question. It might take a little longer at Boulder Canyon or it might take a 
 little longer at Diamond Creek. The opportunities for diverting the river and making 
 it safe to work in are better, in my judgment, at Boulder Canyon than they are at 
 Diamond Creek. The Diamond Creek site, though, is an excellent one for power 
 and some day ought to be developed. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Let me ask you this question, Mr. Davis: Is it not a fact that in the 
 construction of the Boulder Canyon dam or the Glen Canyon dam, if there are 
 intermediate places where you could develop electric energy, that ought to be done 
 by the Government first, so as to have that power for use in the construction of either 
 one of the dams? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. If it could be done cheaper, that is true, but any dam that it i<? wise 
 to put into the Colorado River has got to be a high dam. The foundation conditions 
 and the flood conditions are too strenuous there to permit a small dam that would be 
 safe, and I do not see any very great difference between the time and cost of building 
 a dam of a sriven height in any good site in that canyon. Some of them are a little 
 less accessible than others. The one at Glen Canyon ig very inaccessible. It is 130 
 miles from the railroad and that, of course, would handicap it. The Diamond Creek 
 site and the Boulder Canyon site are both relatively close to the railroad and that 
 would be in their favor. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. How far is the Boulder Canyon from the railroad? 
 
 M r. DAVIS. It is about 30 miles on a straight line and 38 miles by the way the wagon 
 road goes; that is, the dam site that I am speaking of. The Glen Canyon site is about 
 100 miles farther. The Diamond Creek site is a little closer to the railroad. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What I have in mind is that in the construction of many of these plants 
 they construct a small plant to use in building the large one. Now, if it was possible 
 to build, at reasonable cost, a dam or any other structure that would develop electric 
 energy which could be used in constructing the dam, you would have that power to 
 supply to the people in the various States that are near by.
 
 28 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. We have tentative plans, not included in this report, looking to 
 the early development of power for use at that dam and for any other use, of course, 
 that can be made of it at Boulder < 'an yon. We have got to divert the river in order 
 to unwater the foundation. Tunnels are made for that diversion. There will have 
 to be more than one, and probably three, on account of the volume. As soon as the 
 dam is built high enough, so that there is any considerable head, one of these tunnels 
 can be closed and machinery installed in it. ) 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. I beg your pardon, but you say that you will have to divert the river 
 in order to do something 
 
 Mr. DAVIS (interposing). For unwatering the foundation. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You are going to make a tunnel, and then after you get the tunnel 
 you will have to iill up the tunnel again? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. We might. Those tunnels might be used later, and I think they 
 would. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You say for unwatering it? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes; dry-ing it up. We have got to excavate the river without the 
 water in it. It is entirely feasible and convenient to use one of those tunnels after 
 the dam is up high enough to give head enough for the purpose, to install machinery 
 there and develop power which will be used in the construction of the main dam. 
 That first dam will be built to a certain height, which is described in this report, on 
 the foundation that it would require for itself only, so as to get that up as quickly as 
 possible and get away from the menace of floods. That dam would be high enough 
 to store the floods to some extent and divert them through the tunnel without danger 
 of its overwhelming the work, and then the excavation below would be finished and 
 the large dam completed. The first dam would be relatively small, but it would 
 furnish a head for the power plant in the tunnel, just what Judge Raker has described, 
 a small plant that would develop power for use on the large dam, and of course would 
 fit in very well with the cheapest construction of the dam, and I do not know of any 
 reason why that can not be done as quickly and as well at Boulder Canyon as at any 
 other place in the canyon. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If there were enough power developed there, in addition to the power 
 for use of the plant, would that permit of the excess power being distributed and used 
 by the mines in the valley to which Mr. Hayden has referred? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Certainly, and that would be a necessary and a very wise part of the 
 development, because when the dam is completed we need transmission lines and all 
 the appurtenances, and they can be just as well put in to carry that preliminary 
 power, and used afterwards for the permanent transmission of power. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So the development by and for the Government, as you have des- 
 cribed it, would not only help toward the building of the dam but would commence to 
 develop this territory where the private individuals are now seeking rights for building 
 dams to establish hydroelectric plants? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; and the only physical difference in the time required is the 
 availability of funds. If they can get the money quicker than we can, then they can 
 build it quicker. If they can not, then they can not build it any quicker. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You are not satisfied they could do it any better? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo. The local conditions are such that it is desirable to put that plant 
 in for the construction of the dam itself, if for no other reason, because it is a very large 
 work, over 3,000,000 cubic yards of masonry, and a large amount of excavation, which 
 requires, as everybody knows, a very large quantity of power, and to develop that 
 power on the ground is the cheapest way of getting it. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. I understand there is an immediate market in Arizona to-day lor at 
 least 100,000 horsepower. The copper mines would substitute hydroelectric power for 
 the power now generated by oil and coal. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That market for mining purposes in Arizona is one of the outstanding 
 features of this proposition. The mines of Arizona can not be properly developed 
 without it, and it is bound to come sometime, and the sooner it conies the sooner that 
 development will come, and in that development, Arizona being the leading copper 
 State and very important in gold and silver and other products, the entire country is 
 interested. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I would suggest that you leave out the word ''one. " Arizona, is the 
 leading copper State. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I will be glad to dp that. I know it has been the leading State. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. The statistics will show that Arizona produces more copper than any 
 other State in the Union. .- 
 
 Mr. RAKER. As to the original cost to start the plant, which is the cheaper place? ( 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The cost of starting? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yes.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 29 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. In cost I do not think there is very much difference. I do not know 
 why there should be any. Both will require a railroad. There are a few miles 
 more of railroad to Bpulder Canyon necessary but not enough to make much differ- 
 ence. The Diamond Creek site is difficult to reach right in the canyon but very 
 accessible to a point not far from the site. There is very little difference in the 
 length of time that would be required. The advantage, I think, would be some- 
 what with Boulder Canyon, if it *vere planned to build a big dam, because wo would 
 put in a large plant and could work faster. The present plans for the Diamond 
 Creek development do not call for nearly as high a dam as the Boulder Canyon Dam. 
 
 Mr. SWING. As compared with Glen Canyon, on which no investigation has been 
 made and which is 100 miles farther away from the railroad, which dam, Boulder 
 or Glen Canyon, could be built sooner? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The Boulder Canyon could be built much sooner. We are a year 
 further ahead on the investigation and there would be pretty nearly a year longer 
 required to make Glen Canyon accessible for starting the work and getting in the 
 equipment, and then when you got that you would have a large possibility of power 
 too far from the market to market it. It is 264 miles farther from the Pacific coast 
 than the Boulder Canyon site, by transmission line. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. With the dam site and with the height of dam you contemplate, your 
 statement is that it would practically hold back all of the flood waters? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The most important stream coming in below Boulder Canyon is the Gila. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I know the Gila is below, but I am speaking of the Colorado. It would 
 be sufficient to control practically all the flood waters of the Colorado? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir: and it is the only site where that can be done. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. Mr. Davis, what is the magnitude of that proposed dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Of course, there are some details of that kind that our investigation may 
 influence later, but about 600 feet in height. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. What would be the width at the bottom and at the top? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The width at the river level is about 340 feet at the site that seems most 
 promising in the Boulder Canyon, and the width at the top is about 1,200 feet. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Davis, what is the approximate cost of completing the Boulder 
 Canyon dam and installing the electric plant there? What is the estimate you have 
 now? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The dam itself, by the best estimate we have at present and at the height 
 I spoke of. would be about $48.000,000. The development of power would be more 
 gradual. If we are going to build transmission lines, of course that depends on where 
 you build the line and what kind of line you build, but the development of practically 
 all of the firm power that this site would furnish would cost just about as much as the 
 dam or perhaps a little less. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If the Government appropriates the $48,000.000 and the other a n .11. .la 
 necessary to build the ditch to extend the transmission line, what method and mean.-* 
 and from what source are you going to get the money back to pay the Government, 
 for This money expended? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The lease of the power privileges is ample to cover the cost and pay 
 interest on it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What about the use of the water? Would there be anything from 
 that? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think it would be difficult to make any charge for the use of the water 
 because it would be practically impossible to withhold its benefits. Of course, a 
 charge could be made on lands not yet opened, if Congress so ordered, but the develop- 
 ments from the Colorado River that are feasible are so difficult that no very large 
 charge of that kind could be stood by the average settler. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In your opinion the construction of the necessary diversion dams 
 and canals in order to get the water out of the river, after the Boulder Canyon dam is 
 built, would amount to practically all reclamation charge that the land could stand? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Nearly so. in many cases. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. The reason I asked that question is this: Arizona, being interested 
 in power and anxious to obtain it as cheap as possible, if a part of the cost of the Boul- 
 der Canyon dam could be charged to the irrigable land benefited, that amount of the 
 cost would be taken off of the sum necessary to collect from the sale of power? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In other words, the plan you have proposal is to recover the entile 
 cost of the dam out of power sales and reimburse the Government in that way. If the 
 cost of the Boulder Canyon dam is reduced by the amount that might be fairly appor- 
 tioned to the irrigated lands, the power sharge would be correspondingly reduced? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. Would not the charge for power be based upon the value of the 
 power furnished? You would not cut that down 50 per cent because you were able 
 to shift part of the cost of construction over onto the land, would you?
 
 30 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN T . The theory, as I understand it, is that in building this dam Congress 
 should confer the widest possible public benefit. There are three benefits to be con- 
 ferred: First and primarily, asset out in the report made by Mr. 'Davis, the relief of the 
 Imperial Valley from possibility of destruction by flood; second, if stated in this order, 
 the conservation of the water for purposes of irrigation; and, third, for the develop- 
 ment of hydroelectric power. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. When you commence selling that power and regulating the price y 
 of it in the way you indicated, I think you open up a A-ery different problem. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It seems to me that the irrigator under a reclamation project is entitled 
 to receive his water as cheaply as it can be served to him. I think that is in the 
 public interest. It would also be in the public interest for the United States to sell 
 this power as cheaply as it could be sold and still reimburse the Government within 
 a period of years. The cheaper the power the greater the stimulation to the mining 
 and every other industry in the entire territory tributary to the power development. 
 There can be no question but what cheap coal or cheap oil builds up industrial com- 
 munities and cheap hydroelectric power will do the same thing. The Government 
 should not seek to obtain a greater revenue out of the development of power on 
 the Colorado River over and above the amount necessary to recoup itself. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. Without wishing to interrupt further, my point is that it would not 
 be proper to shift the cost of construction over to the land, up to the highest point 
 that it could possibly carry, in order to sell power for less than it was actually worth. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I have no such idea in mind. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Davis, in that connection, if we start out on the theory that this 
 is entirely for power and that the power will repay the cost of construction and the 
 maintenance and interest, and it will also irrigate 2,000,000 acres of land, and the 
 2,000,000 acres of land would not pay anything for the benefits they received, we can 
 not talk very hard or very long on the question of irrigation and the prevention of 
 flood, unless they pay a reasonable proportion of the cost for the benefit they receive; 
 is not that right? 
 
 The irrigation resources of the lower Colorado River are limited. There is less 
 land that can be reached within feasible cost than there is water for. We should 
 ultimately equalize that river for power purposes, if for no other, and we could use 
 it all in irrigation if the land was available. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What I meant was that we should not give preference to either, but 
 if there is a benefit to irrigation and flood control, they should meet some of the cost 
 that brings about that condition. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The trouble is that we are talking about a man who is not there, and there 
 is no way you can make him meet it. He will not meet it unless he chooses, and if 
 you make the price too high, he will not choose to meet it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I do not mean to make it too high. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is the point. That is what stops development and that is where 
 the limit is. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I thought we were figuring on the matter of flood control and irrigation. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And if we thus benefit this 2,000,000 acres of land, they should stand 
 for a reasonable proportion of the cost. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. While I have not figured it out in detail. I will venture that if you put 
 enough of the price of the dam upon the land that is to be benefited by flood control 
 and irrigation to make a difference of 1 mill per kilowatt hour in the price of that 
 power, it would be prohibitive on most of that land. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. In your opinion the power resource is so great that there is no ques- 
 tion about the ability of the Boulder Canyon project both to produce power and then 
 to sell it at a comparatively low price which will be sufficient to fully reimburse the 
 Government for the cost of the dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes; that is the fact, and the cost of the dam itself is only a fraction of 
 the cost of that power delivered to the user. In the first place, the installation of 
 the machinery is about as great in cost as the cost of the dam. The cost of the trans- 
 mission for distant points would be nearly as great, and the cost of the motors and the 
 upkeep of the transmission lines and their operation is expensive, and all those things 
 taken together make the cost of the dam. so far a? it might be saddled onto irrigation 
 or anything else, relatively trivial. 
 
 The proposed plan for paying for the Boulder Canyon Dam from power receipts is 
 not only the most practical but is the most just. This is illustrated by the operations 
 of the reclamation act. For example, in Salt River Valley we have constructed a s 
 project at a cost of about $11,000,000, all of which must be paid back by the farms ( 
 which receive the irrigation water. The city of Phoenix, which pays nothing to the 
 Government for this work, is the greatest beneficiary of the project, and has in fact
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 31 
 
 received benefit? due to this construction far in excess of the entire cost of the project; 
 but there is no method under existing law by which these benefits can be collected. 
 The cost must all be carried by the farmer or bv the Government. This is unjust. 
 
 The construction of a large reservoir in Boulder Canyon will provide flood control, 
 making safe the districts below which are now threatened by the floods of the Colo- 
 rado. It will regulate the river so as to provide irrigation for a large additional acreage 
 of land. It will furnish cheap po\ver for the mines of Arizona and Xevada. All 
 these direct benefits will build up the country that is tributary to Los Angeles, San 
 Diego, Prescott, Phoenix, and the other cities of California and Arizona. There is 
 no way of collecting from those cities anv portion of the cost except through the sale 
 of power. Under the plan proposed this does furnish a means by which the cities 
 indirectly benefited by the development will pay a small portion of the cost of that 
 development. They have the ability to pay and justice demands they should pay 
 something for the great benefits conferred in the stimulation of their tributary ter- 
 ritory. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. Mr. Davis, are all of these projects below this proposed dam site. 
 the Yuma project and the Imperial Valley project. Federal projects? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo. sir; the Imperial Valley was not irrigated by the Government. 
 The Imperial Valley is a district organization. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. As I understood from Judge Swing yesterday, by reason of putting 
 in this dam you would irrigate about 400,000 acres of land on this side, additional to 
 what is being irrigated now in the Imperial Valley? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. Would you propose to furnish the water users or the landowners 
 water free from this project? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo. I would not charge any of this dam to them, but they could not 
 get water free. 
 -Mr. HUDSPETH. That point was not clear in my mind. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. In order to reach that land, we will have to build another structure, 
 which is recommended in this report, a main high-line canal to cost $30,000,000. 
 The rest of the system would cost a great deal, top. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. What would they pay for this additional water that would flow 
 from this dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Nothing. They would pay for the works necessary to use that water, 
 and according to my plan would contribute nothing to the res3rvoir itself. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. But they would pay additional money to the Government? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Oh, yes. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. For this additional benefit? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. You would charge to the Imperial Valley its proportionate share of 
 the cost of the all- American canal and you would charge to the additional area that 
 can be irrigated on the mesa above Imperial Valley its share of the cost of that canal 
 and the lateral ditches that may be necessary. If an appropriation were made by 
 Congress or the funds provided by any other means, the lands benefited would be 
 fully charged for the whole cost of that, development? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. And you think that that cost would be about all the land could stand 
 without adding any part of the cost of the Boulder Canyon Dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir. One of our very serious problems was to determine whether 
 or not the mesa lands, which are very sandy, were of such character that a poor settler, 
 the only kind we could get. would go on there and with the charge make good. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Outside of the cost of the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam, 
 the subdam you spoke of and the canal would cost about $30.000,000? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Just the main canal. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The main canal and the subdam there? . 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The dam is already there. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You said there would have to be other appliances. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I mean the whole distribution system. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That would cost about $30,000,000? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo: the main canal would cost about $30,000,000. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That would cover the present Government land there of about 400,000 
 acres? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. There is not that much Government land. There is about 100,000 
 a^res additional, of which less than half is public land. At your left . Mr. < luiinnan. is 
 a package of pamphlets which go into this subject \vhich has now been broached and 
 which I would like to have passed ar.mnd to the members of the committee. It is 
 a report of the board of engineers constituted for that purpose on the all-Americun 
 canal, which was made about two years ago. 
 
 131G 22 PT 1 3
 
 32 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The Government land and all the private land now under irrigation 
 and all that would be benefited by this all-American canal, costing about s:. 0.000.000, 
 would have apportioned or allocated to it that charge. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. All the lands benefited: yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So there would be no one getting benefit without paying in proportion 
 to the benefit they obtained? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is true. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. That would also be true as to the proposed irrigation project on the 
 Colorado River Indian Reservation in Arizona, which has been investigated by the 
 Indian Sendee? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir: that is the plan. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. If a diversion dam v ere built at Headgate Rock with canal? and 
 laterals and levees and other necessary structures to reclaim 100,000 acres of land near 
 Parker, it is vour idea that all the cost of that project, as I have outlined it. would be 
 charged to the land benefited, but that any stored water that came down from the 
 Boulder Canyon Dam would be free of c< 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. And the same would be true of any development in the Mohave 
 Valley made possible by building a dam at Bulls Head Rock? 
 
 Mr: DAVIS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The question has been asked of me by a constituent of mine as to 
 why it is necessary to specify the All-American canal, which is designed to care for 
 lands in California, when no mention is made in the bill of the Colorado River Indian 
 Reservation project and the Mohave Valley project in Arizona? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. They are mentioned in the bill in the general language, but the reason 
 stress is laid upon the All-American canal and other things and an appropriation 
 asked, is that it complies \uth the act of Congress which was entitled. "An act to 
 provide for an examination and report on the condition and possible irrigation develop- 
 ment of the Imperial Valley in California.'' That is the title of the act under which 
 we made this report, and these other subjects are so related to the whole Colorado 
 River that, of course, they come in and were discussed and this bill provides means 
 by which those canals can be built. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It is your contention that, whether the Arizona irrigation projects 
 are specifically mentioned or not, if the bill as written were to become a law the Re- 
 clamation Service coula then undertake the reclamation of all the irrigable land below 
 Boulder Canyon within the United States? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I think that is correct, as fast as funds are provided. 
 
 Mr. RAKEF. In other words, Mr. Davis, the cost of the constru'ction of the Boulder 
 Canyon dam and its maintenance and the cost of all transmission lines connected with 
 it would depend upon the repayments from power from that dam exclusively? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And then below the Boulder Canyon dam, all additional or secondary 
 projects, like the Indian Reservation spoken of and the all-American canal and any 
 others, would pay individually for that expense by those who used the water? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. It is a fact. Mr. Chairman, that in the decades of develop- 
 ment we have had in irrigation, all of the easy projects have been built, apd the only 
 way of increasing the resources of irrigated land in any part of the West, with a few 
 trivial exceptions, is by expensive work, that requires a long time for construction 
 and a great deal of money, and if the cost of those works is increased, some of them 
 are made not feasible and others are made not feasible for a period of time; and in 
 this case, where the full conservation of the water is in excess of the land that is 
 not true everywhere but it is on the lower Colorado it would he a destruction of re- 
 sources to put any unnecessary charge upon the lands to be irrigated. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Mr. Davis, would the primary benefit of this dam be the protection 
 of the Imperial Valley? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is the most urgent thing. Mr. Sinnott; yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Then in the next place, power? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. In money value the power comes first. In operation. I think irrigation 
 should have the preference, because it would disturb power very little to accommo- 
 date itself to irrigation, whereas if you reveised it, you might make prohibitive some 
 of the irrigation. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Can you take care of all the hazards of the river at the Boulder Dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. You mean during construction? 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Xo; I mean after it is constructed, can you care for all the flood waters 
 of the river at the Boulder Dam? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir; if built as proposed, it will hold more than an entire year's 
 flow. It will hold nearly all of a maximum year's flow if it were empty. It will not 
 be necessary, however, to hold it empty, because at that point the floods all come in 
 about three months; in fact, nearly always in June.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 33 
 
 Mr. SiN'NOTT. What is the minimum flow in second feet? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. At that point s '.miething like 4,000 cubic feet per second in very low 
 years. It seldom goes down to that amount. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. What is the mean flow? . 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The mean flow is about 22,000 second-feet. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. And the mixirnum? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Something; like 200.000. as nearly as our records show it. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. About four times the low water flow of the Columbia, which is about 
 50.000 second feet at The Dalles? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. I did not .suppose that the Columbia down at The Dalles ever 
 got that low. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. Yes: the minimum is about 50.000 second feet. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. Mr. Davis. I would like to ask you a, question because this is a matter 
 that will come up and by getting a little information on it now we will have some- 
 thing upon which to act. Suppose the Boulder Canyon Dam is put in as designated, 
 fully equipped with electric distributing lines and all that sort of thing, you can 
 control all the flood waters? 
 
 Mr. I >.\vis. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Would that relieve the condition down at the diverting dam of the 
 present Imperial Valley Canal? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No. Relief at that point requires a connection of the Imperial Canal 
 with the Laguna Dam, which means the building of about 15 or 16 miles of canal. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The floods being controlled, could those people use their present 
 works with considerable safety? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. With greater safety, yes. sir: but the floods of the Gila River, of course, 
 would still be there and until that is taken care of I do not think the conditions would 
 be entirely safe. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then with the Boulder Canyon Dam completed and with the present 
 condition of the works there, the Imperial Valley people are still in the same condition 
 they are now, by virtue of the flood waters from the Gila River? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. No; not the same condition they are in now, because the major menace 
 will be removed. The greatest menace to the Imperial Valley is not merely the 
 breaking of the levees, but a break at the beginning of the high water period of the 
 Colorado River, when it will be in too large volume to be controlled, and will continue 
 to run into the valley for a period of months, cutting a great deep gash in there that 
 it will afterwards be practically impossible or at least very difficult and very expensive 
 to close, and which would submerge a lot of land before you could get it closed. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If we are now going to relieve them from the flood waters of the Colorado 
 River, they will still have difficulty on their hands by virtue of the flood waters from 
 the Gila River, even though the Colorado River floods are controlled? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo, sir; for this reason: The floods of the Gila River are so short that while 
 they will still have to levee against them, they are not very likely to destroy the levee 
 because they do not last long enough to cut the banks and" undermine the levee; and 
 in the second place, if they should destroy the levee and go through, they are over so 
 quickly that repairs can be made in the dry. 
 
 Mr. SWING. The Imperial Valley would still have the problem of getting the water 
 out of the river and getting it to the Imperial Valley without going to Mexico, unless 
 the all- American canal were built? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I was leaving Mexico out of it and was just referring to the physical 
 conditions already existing. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. The Gila River should ultimately be controlled, but the floods 
 from that river are not as dangerous by any means as tne floods of the Colorado. 
 
 Mr. HAVDEX. In your report you state that there are 520,000 acres of land now irri- 
 gated below Boulder Canyon and about 700,000 additional acres could be irrigated 
 as far as you have investigated the matter. The table which you have in your report 
 shows that there is now irrigated in Arizona by gravity 54,000 acres; that there can be 
 irrigated by gravity 155.000 acres additional. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. What page is that on? 
 
 Mr. HAVDEX. The table is printed on the colored map inserted before page 21. 
 That makes a total of 209,000 acres that could be irrigated by gravity. The table 
 shows 70.000 acres to be irrigated by pumping or a total of 279,000 acres that you 
 estimate can be irrigated in Arizona. Many people in Arizona, of which I am one, 
 have been hopeful that a much larger area might be irrigated from the Colorado River 
 in our State. I want to ask you what detailed study you have made of the irrigation 
 possibilities in Arizona. If cheap power were available have you made investigations 
 as to the possibility of lifting water upon the higher mesas and thus reclaiming addi- 
 tional tracts of land?
 
 34 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. There are undoubtedly small tracts here and there the aggregate 
 being considerable that could be added by increasing the pumping lift, of couife. 
 It is admitted there is considerable margin of expansion possible. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It would depend, to a large extent, on how cheap the power was as 
 to how high the water could be lifted. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The cheaper the power the more extensive the area which can be 
 irrigated? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. There has been some discussion of a high-line canal following about 
 the 1,200 or 1,300 foot contour below Boulder Canyon, which would cover an immense 
 area of land in Arizona. I have made a study of the map of Arizona and find that a 
 very large proportion of the area proposed to be irrigated by this high-line canal 
 has never been topographically mapped. I have inquired of the United States 
 Geological Survey as to whether funds were available for a topographic survey of 
 northern Yuma County and the western part of Maricopa County. The director has 
 not given me a very definite answer except to say that he thought that it might be 
 highly desirable to have such a survey made in cooperation with the State of Arizona. 
 Have you ever made a study to determine what areas in southwestern Arizona should 
 be accurately mapped, to ascertain the additional lands that might he irrigated fiom 
 the Colorado River? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. There is an investigation about starting now in the State of 
 Arizona, where, on their request we are to detail one engineer and the Geological 
 Survey one engineer, and the State one, and that board will have charge of a fund 
 the State has for making investigations of contour in the Colorado Valley and any part 
 of southwestern Arizona and will undoubtedly throw light on what could be topo- 
 graphically mapped. I could lay out by guess what could be, but I do not think that 
 should be taken as a guide, because the information is too meager in the unmapped 
 regions. Some such preliminary investigation as this would be a good undertaking 
 to find out how much money would be necessary for it all. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. About how much money would be necessary for such an investiga- 
 tion? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I have not been informed, but they have asked us if we would under- 
 take that kind of cooperation and we have answered in the affirmative. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. After these three engineers have made a reconnaissance examination 
 of the country, will it then be possible to intelligently direct the Geological Survey 
 as to what areas should be topographically surveyed with a view to determining 
 whether irrigation from the Colorado River is practicable? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. I understand the Boulder Dam will cost about $48,000,000? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. And the construction of power lines and other construction neces- 
 sary to utilize the power would probably cost about an equal amount? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. It would run about $100,000,000. It would depend upon where the 
 power was taken. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. But figuring on general averages down through that country of 
 mileages. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. As near as I care to state it would take a little more than the cost of the 
 dam. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. So practically $100,000,000 to utilize the power that would create 
 the revenue which is to repay the cost of construction? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. The whole thing. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. Is the Government to advance that $100,000,000? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. According to the bill, no. The bill as introduced and referred to this 
 committee provided only for the construction of the dam and the high-line canal, and 
 the Secretary of the Interior in his report on it suggests a method of financing and a 
 program of building also the generating machinery, that would be built at the site of the 
 dam, leaving the customers, the power companies, and others to build their own 
 transmission lines. 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. As I understand, there would be about 400,000 additional acres that 
 could be irrigated from that? What charge have you estimated will probably be put 
 on that land for water? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. What I had in mind was to charge them the cost of the works, but the 
 details of the distribution system have not been gone into. The main canal would cost 
 about $30,000,000, and that divided by the acreage it would serve, would 
 
 Mr. SUMMERS. That would all be charged to this 400,000 acres irrigated?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWEK COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 35 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo, not at all. The present irrigated lands would be charged with 
 some of it, I think. That is a matter to be left to some kind of equitable adjudication 
 by the Secretary of Inferior later. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN-. Under the Secretary's plan how much will the Government be 
 supposed to advance S48,000,000 for the dam and how much? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. In the neighborhood of $100,000,000. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. As I read Secretary Fall's report on this bill he suggests a bonding 
 plan somewhat similar to that upon which funds were raised to constiuct the Panama 
 Canal? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS, lie suggested the bonding plan. I do not remember how closely it 
 was followed in the Panama Canal, but it has this difference: that the same authority 
 requires him to sell this power at a rate to provide interests and sinking funds to 
 retire those bonds. In other words, the requirement is put on this that will stand the 
 cost of those bonds the amortization. That is not connected with the Panama Canal. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKX. The Panama Canal was built by direct appropriations, but wherever 
 there was a lack of funds in the Treasury authority was granted to the Secretary 
 of the Treasury to sell bonds, and some Panama Canal bonds were sold. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is true. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKX. If there is to be a bond issue should it not be large enough to include 
 both the construction of the Boulder Canyon dam and the power plants and then to 
 provide for the various irrigation projects down the stream that may be demonstrated 
 to be feasible? In other words, should not the same bond issue also take care of the 
 Parker irrigation project and all-American canal for Imperial Valley as well as for the 
 Boulder Canyon dam itself? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Xo. It would have to be treated separately, because it would have 
 to be refunded in a different manner, and in my opinion the irrigation projects some 
 of them certainly and perhaps most of them could not stand an interest charge. 
 At least, they could not with the certainty that the power can, and the market for 
 bonds with irrigation basis would not be near so good as with the power basis, because 
 the power basis is sure shot it will pay we know that. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. What proportion of thifl entire amount would be reimbursable is to 
 be repaid from the us" of the plant and all its accessories? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. All of it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The entire amount? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. si?-. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. So. there is no direct appropriation for even the development or the 
 prevention of floods that is not to be repaid from the entire plant? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. By some one who eventually uses it? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. That is the idea. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And your view is. from your examination of all the reports, that within 
 a reasonable length of time the money can be repaid and will be repaid with a rea- 
 sonable rate of interest? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir: so far as the bill and the Secretary's amendments to the bill 
 are concerned that is true. So far as irrigation is concerned, I have my doubt about 
 some of them being able to pay interest : but those covered by the bill certainly could. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. In this bill then we do not even go as far as we do in the Sacramento 
 River flood control or in the Mississippi River flood control, that is. to provihe funds 
 to develop and prevent the Hood caused by those rivers overflowing adjoining lands, 
 and we get no record return from the latter two as in<li\ iduals? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. In that respect it is distinctly different; yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Is not the distinction due to the fact that the Sacramento and Mis- 
 sissippi Rivers are navigable streams, and under the flood control act there was a find- 
 ing by a board of Army engineers as to what Federal interest was involved? Part of 
 the on.-t \\;>- cl, to the United States by reason of navigation and the remainder 
 
 is a charge against lands benefited by the levees. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. I do not know anything about the engineers' report, but I do know that 
 the Colorado River is navigable in the same sense that the Sacramento River is. 
 They are both technically and actually navigable, but practically little used. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The main point that I was trying to find our i> that there \vill he IM 
 question hereafter about what relief will be given the Imperial Valley by virtue of con- 
 trolling the floods. We are doing now for the Sa'-ramentu River and the great Mis- 
 sissippi River the same thing, and it is not reimbursable. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. But with this entire dam, commencing with the Boulder Creek dam 
 and all its accessories and uses, you are to charge enough money for its use to, within 
 a reasonable time, repay the principal with interest?
 
 36 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Your statement would be absolutely accurate. Judge Raker, if you 
 would say that a part of the Mississippi flood control work and a part of Sacramento 
 flood control work is done as a gratuity on the part of the Government. The whole 
 amount is not. I am quite sure, appropriated and paid for out of the Federal Treasury. 
 There is a substantial charge against the levee districts. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I did not go into that. So far as the Government appropriation is con- 
 cerned, we spent this money. It is not a criticism, but we spent the money for flood 
 control and I am just wondering whether or not in this instance they could make any 
 objection that we prevent floods from the Imperial Valley, where, as a matter of fact. 
 all the money expended in this enterprise is to be reimbursed. 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. On the Mississippi River the levee districts are supposed to con- 
 tribute one third and the Government two thirds, two-thirds being contributed by the 
 Federal Government on the theory the river is navigable. The Mississippi River 
 people at this time are contemplating a scheme somewhat like this: In order to complete 
 the construction of the levees on the Mississippi River and do it by the issuing of bonds 
 of the levee districts and turning those funds in by paying all the expense of the projects. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But there is this distinction, bearing in mind that this territory now 
 could be destroyed might be destroyed any day by virtue of floods and by building 
 the Boulder Canvon Dam it will prevent the floods and the Government will be reim- 
 bursed for all this money expended. Down below, as to the question of irrigation, on 
 the question of a canal or any system they put in there, these people for the use of that 
 canal will pay all the expense. That is right, is it not, Mr. Davis? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. They will return all that is put into it. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. You are simply pointing out the expenditures contemplated on the 
 Mississippi River and the expenditures here. In one case on the Mississippi River 
 it will never be returned to the Government, and here it will all be returned? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I want to get your statement clear on that money question. He 
 asked you how much money the Government would have to put up on this whole 
 proposition. Is it not a fact that the Secretary, under his bill, can enter into a contract 
 after he starts that work and receive money to finish this dam, so that the Government 
 would not have to put up this entire amount? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. If the Secretary's recommendations are passed the Government will not 
 have to appropriate anything. It provides for the issuing of bonds by the Government 
 and the Government credit being behind them, and the bonds to be paid off from the 
 power receipts, interest and principal. 
 
 The CHAIRMAN. The Government backs the bonds? 
 
 Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; the Government backs the bonds. 
 
 (Thereupon, at 12.10, the committee adjourned.) 
 
 Supreme Court of the United States Xo. 3 Original. October term, 1921. The 
 State of Wyoming, complainant, v. The State of Colorado, the Greeley-Poudre 
 Irrigation District, and the Laramie-Poudre Reservoirs and Irrigation Company. 
 
 [June 5, 1922.] 
 
 Mr. Justice VAN DEVAXTER delivered the opinion of the court. 
 
 This is an original suit in this court by the State of Wyoming against the State of 
 Colorado and two Colorado corporations to prevent a proposed diversion in Colorado 
 of part of the waters of the Laramie River, an interstate stream. The bill was brought 
 in 1911, the evidence was taken in 1913 and 1914, and the parties put it in condensed 
 and narrative form in 1916 preparatory to the usual printing. The case has been 
 argued at the bar three times. The court directed one reargument because of the 
 novelty and importance of some of the questions involved, and the other because of 
 an intervening succession in the office of Chief Justice. As the United States appeared 
 to have a possible interest in some of the questions, the court also directed that the 
 suit be called to the attention of the Attorney General: and. by the court's leave, a 
 representative of the United States participated in the subsequent hearings. 
 
 The Laramie is an unnavigable river which has its source in the mountains of north- 
 ern Colorado, flows northerly 27 miles in that State, crosses into Wyoming, and there 
 flows northerly and northeasterly 150 miles to the North Platte River, of which it is a 
 tributary. Both Colorado and Wyoming are in the arid region where flowing waters 
 are, and long have been, commonly diverted from their natural channels and used in 
 irrigating the soil and making it productive. For many years some of the waters .of 
 the Laramie River have been subjected to such diversion and use, part in Colorado 
 and part in Wyoming.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 37 
 
 When this suit was brought the two corporate defendants, acting under the authority 
 and permission of Colorado, were proceeding to divert in that State a considerable 
 portion of the waters of the river and to conduct the same into another watershed, 
 lying wholly in Colorado, for use in irrigating lands more than fifty miles distant from 
 the point of diversion. The topography and natural drainage are such that none of the 
 water can return to the stream or ever reach Wyoming. 
 
 By the bill Wyoming seeks to prevent this diversion on two grounds: One that, 
 without her sanction, the waters of this interstate stream can not riditi'ully be taken 
 from its watershed and carried into another where she never can receive any benefit 
 from them; and the other that through many appropriations made at great cost, which 
 are prior in time and superior in right to the proposed Colorado diversion, Wyoming 
 and her citizens have become and are entitled to use a large portion of the waters of 
 the river in the irrigation of lands in that State and that the proposed Colorado diver- 
 sion will not leave in the stream sufficient water to satisfy these prior and superior 
 appropriations, and so will work irreparable prejudice to Wyoming and her citizens. 
 
 By the answers Colorado and her codefendants seek to justify and sustain the pro- 
 posed diversion on three distinct grounds: First, that it is the right of Colorado as a 
 State to dispose, as she may choose, of any part or all of the waters flowing in the por- 
 tion of the river within her borders, "regardless of the prejudice that it may work'' 
 to Wyoming and her citizens; secondly, that Colorado is entitled to an equitable 
 division of the waters of the river and that the proposed diversion, together with all 
 subsisting appropriations in Colorado, does not exceed her share: and. thirdly, that 
 after the proposed diversion there will be left in the river and its tributaries inWyoming 
 sufficient water to satisfy all appropriations in that State whose origin was prior in 
 time to the effective inception of the right under which the proposed Colorado diversion 
 is about to be made. 
 
 Before taking up the opposing contentions a survey of several matters in the light 
 of which they should be approached and considered is in order. 
 
 Both Colorado and Wyoming are along the apex of the Continental Divide, and 
 include high mountain ranges where heavy snows fall in winter and melt in late spring 
 and early summer, this being the chief source of water supply. Small streams in 
 the mountains gather the water from the malting snow and conduct it to larger streams 
 bi'bw which ultimately pass into surrounding States. The flow in all streams varies 
 greatly in the cours3 of the year, being highest in May, Tune, and July, and relatively 
 verv low in other months. There is also a pronounced variation from year to year. 
 To illustrate, the gauging of the Cache la Poudre, a typical stream, for 191^ shows that 
 the total flo\v for May, Jun Q , and July was more than three times that for the nine 
 other momh<, and the gauging for a pariod of 30 years shows that the yearly flow varied 
 from 151,636 to 666,466 acre-feet 1 and was in excess of 400,000 acre-feet in each of four 
 years uu-I !<<- than 175.000 acre-feat in each of five years. Both Stat"s have vast 
 plains and many valleys of varying elevation where there is not sufficient natural 
 precipitation to moi-T"ii rh soil and make it productive, but where, when additional 
 water is applied artificially, the soil becomes fruitful the reward being generous in 
 some areas and moderate in others, just as husbandry is variously rewarded in States 
 where there is greater humidity, such as Massachusetts, Virginia. Ohio, and Tennessee. 
 Both States were Territories long before they were admitted into the Union as States 
 and while the Territorial condition continued were under the full dominion of the 
 United States. At first the United States owned all the lands in both and it still owns 
 and is offering for disposal millions of acres in ouch. 
 
 Turning to the decisions of the courts of last tvsurt in the two States, we learn that 
 the same doctrine respecting the diversion and use of the waters of natural streams 
 has prevailed in both from the beginning and that <'.irh St-ite ai tributes much of her 
 development and prosperity to the practical operation of this doctrine. The relevant 
 views of the origin and nature of the doctrine as shown in these decisions may be 
 summarized as follows: The common law rule respecting riparian rights in flowing 
 water never obtained in either State. It always was deemed inapplicable to their 
 situation and climatic conditions. The earliest settlers gave effect to a different rule 
 whereby the waters of the streams were regarded as open to appropriation for irrigation, 
 mining; and other beneficial purposes. The diversion from the stream and the applica- 
 tion of the water to a beneficial purpose constituted an appropriation, and the ap- 
 propriator was treated as acquiring a continuing right to divert and use the water to 
 the extent of his appropriation, but not beyond what was reasonably required and 
 actually used. This was deemed a property right and dealt with and respected ac- 
 cordingly. As between different appropriations from the same stream, the one iir.-t 
 in time was deemed superior in right, and a completed appropriation was regarded as 
 effective from the time the purpose to make it was definitely formed and actual work 
 
 1 An acre-foot is the quantity of water required to cover an acre to a depth of one foot 13,560 cubic feet.
 
 38 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER. COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 thereon was begun, provided the work was carried to completion with reasonable 
 diligence. This doctrine of appropriation, prompted by necessity and formulated 
 by custom, received early legislative recognition in both Territories and -vas enforced 
 in their couit-. When the state? were admitted into the Union it received further 
 sanction in their constitutions and statutes and their courts have been uniformly 
 enforcing it. Yunker r. Nichols (1 Colo. 551): Schilling r. Romincrer (4 Colo. 100); 
 Coffin r. Left Hand Ditch Co. (6 Colo. 443); Thomas v. Guiraud i U Colo. 530 : Strickler ( 
 r. Colorado Springs (16 Colo. 61); Oppenlander r. Left Hand Ditch Co. (1$ Colo. 142); 
 Wyatt r. Larimer" and Weld Irrigation Co. (18 Colo. 298); Crippen v. White (28 Colo. 
 298); Moyer r. Preston (6 Wyo. 308); Farm Investment Co. r. Carpenter (!i Wyo. L10); 
 Willev c". Decker (11 Wyo." 496); Johnston 7'. Little Horse Creek Irrieatimr Co. (13 
 Wyo. 208). 
 
 As the United States possessed plenary authority over Colorado and Wyoming 
 while they were Territories and has at all times owned the public lands therein, we 
 turn next to its action. 
 
 The act of July 26. 1866 (ch. 262. sec. 9. 14 Stat. 251 '. contained a section providing: 
 ' ' Whenever, by priori ty of "possession, rights to the use of water for mining, agricultural , 
 manufacturing, or other purposes have vested and accrued, and the same are recog- 
 nized and acknowledged by the local customs, laws, and the decisions of courts, the 
 pos?essors and owners of such vested rights shall be maintained and protected in the 
 same." The occasion for this provision and its purpose and effect were extensively 
 considered by this court in the cases of Atchison r. Peterson (20 Wall. 507) and Bascy 
 r. Gallagher (20 Wall. 670). the conclusions in both being shown in the following 
 excerpt from the latter, pp. 681-682: 
 
 "In the late case of Atchison r. Peterson, we had occasion to consider the respective 
 rights of miners to running waters on the mineral lands of the public domain: and 
 we there held that by the custom which had obtained among miners in the Pacific 
 States and Territories, the party who first subjected the water to use or took the n< 
 s.uy steps for that purpose, was regarded, except as against the Government, as the 
 source of title in all controversies respecting it: that the doctrines of the common 
 law declaratory of the rights of riparian proprietors were inapplicable, or applicable 
 only to a limited extent, to the necessities of miners, and were inadequate to their 
 protection: that the equality of right recognized by that law among all the proprietors 
 upon the same stream, would have been incompatible with any extended diversion 
 of the water by one proprietor, and its conveyance for mining purposes to points 
 from which it could not be restored to the stream: that the Government l>y its silent 
 acquiescence had assented to and encouraged the occupation of the public lands for 
 mining: and that he who first connected his la) or with property thus situated and 
 open to general exploration, did in natural justice acquire a better right to its use and 
 enjoyment than others who had not given such labor: that the miners on the public 
 lands throughout the Pacific States and Territories, by their customs, usages, and 
 regulations, had recognized the inherent justice of this principle, and the principle 
 itself was at an early period recognized by legislation and enforced by the courts in 
 those States and Territories, and was finally approved by the legislation of Congress 
 in 1866. The views there expressed and the rulings made are equally applicable to 
 the use of water on the public lands for purposes of irrigation. Xo distinction is made 
 in those States and Territories by the custom of miners or settlers, or by the courts, 
 in the rights of th,e first appropriator from the use made of the water, if the use be a 
 beneficial one." 
 
 And on the same subject it was further said, in Broder r. Water ('<>. 101 U. S. 274, 
 
 "It is the established doctrine of this court that rights of miners, who had taken 
 possession of mines and worked and developed them, and the ri-rhts of persons who 
 had constructed canals and ditches to be used in mining operations and for purp< 
 of agricultural irrigation, in the region where such artificial use of the water was an 
 absolute necessity, are rights which the Government had. by its conduct, recognixed 
 and encouraged and was bound to protect, before the passage of the act of I860'. We 
 are of opinion that the section of the act which we have quoted was rather a voluntary 
 recognition of a preexisting right of possession, constituting a valid claim of its con- 
 tinued use, than the establishment of a new 01 
 
 The act of July 9, 1870 (ch. 235. sec. 17. Hi Stat. 217 ), provided that ''all patents 
 granted, or preemption or homesteads allowed, shall be subject to any vested and 
 accrued water rights" acquired under or recognized by the provision of 186G. These 
 provisions are now sections 2339 and 2340 of the Revised Statutes. < 
 
 The act of March 3. L877 (ch. IT. 8ec. I, lit Star. 377 . providing for the sale of (.-' 
 desert lands in tracts of one section each to persons undertaking and effecting their 
 reclamation, contained a proviso declaring that "the right to the use of water by the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 39 
 
 person so conducting the same, on or to any tract of desert land of six hundred and 
 forty acres shall depend upon bona fide prior appropriation; and such right shall 
 not exceed the amount of water actually appropriated, and necessarily used for the 
 purpose of irrigation and reclamation: and all surplus water over and above such 
 actual appropriation and use, together with the water of all lakes, rivers, and other 
 sources of water supply upon the public lands, and not navigable, shall remain and 
 be held free for the appropriation and use of the public for irrigation, mining, and 
 manufacturing purposes subject to exist ing rights." Colorado was not at first included 
 in this act, but was brought in by an amendatory act. Next came the act of March 3, 
 1891 (ch. 561, sec. 18, 26 Stat. 1095), granting right of way through the public lands 
 and resarvations for canals and ditches to be used for irrigation purposes, and con- 
 taining a proviso saying, "the privilege herein granted . shall not be construed to 
 interfere with the control of water for irrigation and other purposes under authority 
 of the respective States or Territories." 
 
 Of the legislation thus far recited it was said, in United States r. Rio Grande Irriga- 
 tion Co. (174 U. S. 690, 706): "Obviously by these acts, so far as they extended, Con- 
 gress recognized and assented to the appropriation of water in contravention of the 
 common-law rule as to continuous flow"; and again, "the obvious purpose of Congress 
 waS to give its a c s?nt, so far ai the public lands were concerned, to any s> stem, although 
 in contravention to the common-law rule, which permitted the appropriation of those 
 waters far legitimate industries." 
 
 June 17. 1902 i.ch. 1093, 32 Stat. 388), the national reclamation act was passed, 
 under which the United States entered upon the construction of extensive irrigation 
 works to be used in the reclamation of large bodies of arid public lands in the Western 
 States. Its eighth section declared: "Nothing in this act shall be construed as af- 
 fecting or intended to affect or to in any way interfere with the laws of any State or 
 Territory relating to the control, appropriation, use, or distribution of water used in 
 irrigation, or any vested right acquired thereunder, and the Secretary of the Interior, 
 in carrying out the provisions of this act, shall proceed in conformity with such laws, 
 inul itu!hiii<! In riin shall in umj n'aij affect any right of any State or of the Federal 
 .it or of any lundotcner. appropriator, or user of -water in, to, or from any 
 mterstati stream or we n-ti/crx thereof: rmridnl. That the right to the use of water 
 acquired under the provisions of this act shall be appurtenant, to the land irrigated, 
 and beneficial use shall be the basis, the measure, and the limit of the right." The 
 words which we have italicized constitute the only instance, so far as we are advised, 
 in which the legislation of Congress relating to the appropriation of water in the arid 
 land region has contained any distinct mention of interstate streams. The explana- 
 tion of this exceptional mention is to be found in the pendency in this court at that 
 time of the case of Kansas r. Colorado, wherein the relative rights of the two States, 
 the United States, certain Kansas riparians and certain Colorado appropriators 
 and users in and to the waters of the Arkansas River, an interstate stream, were thought 
 to be involved. Congress was solicitous that all quest ions respecting interstate streams 
 thought, to be involved in that litigation should be left to judicial determination 
 unaffected by the act: in other words, that the matter be left just as it was before. 
 The words aptly reflect that purpo 
 
 The decision in Kansas r. Colorado (206 U. S. 4(i) was a pioneer in its field. On 
 some of the questions presented it was intended to be and is comprehensive, and on 
 others it was intended to be within narrower limits, the court saying, "The views 
 expressed in this opinion are to be confined to a case in which the facts and the local 
 law of the two States are as here disclosed." On full consideration it was broadly 
 determined that a controversy I KM ween two States over the diversion and use of 
 waters of a stream passing from one to the other "makes a matter for investigation and 
 determination by this court" in the exercise of its original jurisdiction, and also that 
 the upper State on such a stream does not have such ownership or control of the waters 
 flowing therein as entitles her to divert and use them regardless of any injury or preju- 
 dice to the rights of the lower State in the stream. And, on consideration of the 
 particular facts disclosed and the local law of the two Suites, it was determined that 
 Colorado was not taking more than what under the circumstances would lie her share 
 under an equitable apportionment. 
 
 As respects the scope 'and interpretation of the ultimate conclusion in that case, 
 it should he observed, first, that the court was there concerned, as it said, with a 
 controversy between two States, "one recognizing generally the common-law rule of 
 riparian rights'" and the other the doctrine of appropriation: secondly, that the diver- 
 sion complained of was not 1o a watershed from which none of the water could find its 
 way into the complaining State, but quite to the contrary: and, thirdly, that what 
 the complaining State was seeking was not to prevent a projmsed diversion for the 
 benefit of lands as yet unreclaimed, but to interfere with u diversion which had been
 
 40 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 practiced for years and under which many thousands of acres of unoccupied and 
 barren lands had been reclaimed and made productive. In these circumstances, and 
 after observing that the diminution in the flow of the river had resulted in "percepti- 
 ble injurv" TO portions of the valley in Kansas, but in "little, if anv. detriment" to 
 the great body of the valley, the court said, "It would seem equality of right and equity 
 between the two States forbids any interference with the present withdrawal of water 
 in Colorado for purposes of irrigation." and that if the depletion of the waters by C 
 Colorado should be increased, the time would come when Kansas mi'.-ht " rightfully V 
 call for relief against the action of Colorado, its corporations, and citi/.ens in appropri- 
 ating the waters of the Arkansas for irrigation purposes." What was there said about 
 ''eiualitv of rurht" refers, as the opinion shows ,-p. !)7i, not to an e'jual division of 
 the water, but to the e ]ual level or plane on which all the State- stand, in point of 
 power and right, under our constitutional system. 
 
 Like that case, the one now before us presents a controversy over the waters of an 
 interstate stream. But here the controversy is between States in both of which the 
 doctrine of appropriation has prevailed from the time of the lirst settlements, alwavs 
 has been applied in the same way. and has been recognized and sanctioned by the 
 United States, the owner of the public lands. Here the complaining State is not 
 seeking to impose a policy of her choosing on the other State, but to have the com- 
 mon policy which each enforces within her limits applied in determining their rela- 
 tive rights in the interstate stream. Nor is the United States seeking to impose a 
 policy of its choosing on either State. All that it has done has been to recognize 
 and give its sanction to the policy which each has adopted. Whether its public land 
 holdings would enable it to go further we need not consider. And here the complain- 
 ing State is not seeking to interfere with a diversion which has long been practiced, 
 and under which much reclamation has been effected, but to prevent a proposed 
 diversion for the benefit of lands as yet unreclaimed . 
 
 With this understanding of the case in hand and of some of the matters in the light 
 of which it should be considered, we take up the several contentions, before noticed, 
 which are pressed on our attention. 
 
 The contention of Colorado that she as a State rightfully may divert and use, as she 
 may choose, the waters flowing within her boundaries in this interstate stream, re- 
 gardless of any prejudice, that this may work to others having rights in the stream be- 
 low her boundary, can not be maintained. The river throughout its course in both 
 States is but a single stream wherein each State has an interest which should be re- 
 spected by the other. A like contention was set up by Colorado in her answer in 
 Kansas r. Colorado and was adjudged untenable. Further consideration satisfies us 
 that the ruling was ri;ht. It has support in other cases, of which Rickey Land & Cattle 
 Co. v. Miller and Lux (218 U. S. 2158 : I Jean v. Morris ( 221 U. S. 485); Missouri s. 
 Illinois (180 U. S. 208 and 200 U. S. 496), and Georgia r. Tennessee Copper Co. (206 
 I". S. 230 . are examples. 
 
 The objection of Wyoming to the proposed diversion on the ground that it is to an- 
 other watershed, from which she can receive no benefit, is also untenable. The fact 
 that the diversion is to such a watershed has a bearing in another connection, but does 
 not in itself constitute a ground for condemning it. In neither State does the right of 
 appropriation depend on the place of use being within the same watershed. Diver- 
 sions from one watershed to another are commonly made in both States and the practice 
 is recognized by the decisions of their courts. Coffin r. Left Hand Ditch Co. (6 Colo. 
 443, 449); Thomas P. Guiraud (6 Colo. 530 r. Hammond v. Rose, i 11 Colo. 524 i; Oppen- 
 lander v. Left Hand Ditch Co. ( IS Colo. 142. 144 >; Mover v. Preston <<i Wvo. 308, 321); 
 Wiley / . Decker i 1 1 Wyo. 4!lfi, o20-o31 I. And the evidence shows that diversions are 
 made and recognized in both States which in principle are not distinguishable from this, 
 that is. where wat er is taken in one State from a watershed leading into the other State 
 and conducted into a different watershed leading away from that State, and from which 
 she never can receive any benefit. The principle of. such diversions being recognized 
 in both States, its application to this interstate stream does not in itself afford a ground 
 for complaint, unless the practice in both be rejected in determining what, as between 
 them, is reasonable and admissible as to this stream, which we think should not be 
 done. 
 
 We are thus brought to the question of the basis on which the relative rights of these 
 Stites in the waters of this interstate stream should be determined. Should the doc- 
 trine of appropriation, which each recognizes and enforces within her borders, be 
 applied'?' Or is there another basis which is more consonant with right and equity? 
 
 The lands in both States are naturally arid and the need for irrigation is the same in 
 one as in the other. The lands were settled under the same public land laws and their f 
 settlement was induced largely by the prevailing right to divert and use water for irri- 
 gation, without which the lands were of little value. Many of the lands were acquired 
 under the deeert land act which made reclamation by irrigation a condition to the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 41 
 
 acquisition. The first settlers located along the streams where water could be diverted 
 and applied at small cost. Others with more means followed and reclaimed lands 
 farther away. Then companies with large capital constructed extensive canals and 
 occasional tunnels whereby water was carried to lands remote from the stream and sup- 
 plied, for hire, to settlers who were not prepared to engage in such large undertakings, 
 ritimatley, the demand for water being in excess of the dependable flow of the streams 
 during the irrigation season, reservoirs were constructed wherein water was impounded 
 when not needed and released when needed, thereby measurably equalizing the 
 natural flew. Such was the course of irrigation development in both States. It began 
 in territorial days, continued without change after statehood, and was the basis for the 
 large respect always shown for water rights. These constituted the foundation of all 
 rural home building and agricultural development, and, if they were rejected now, 
 the lands would return to their naturally arid condition, the efforts of the settlers and 
 the expenditures of others would go for naught and values mounting into large figures 
 would be lost. 
 
 In neither State was the right to appropriate water from this interstate stream denied . 
 On the contrary, it was permitted and recognized in both. The rule was the same on 
 both sides of the line. Some of the appropriations were made as much as 50 years ago 
 and many as much as 25. In the circumstances we have stated, why should not 
 appropriations from this stream be respected, as between the two States, according 
 to their several priorities, as would be done if the stream lay wholly within either 
 State? By what principal of right or equity may either State proceed in disregard 
 of prior appropriations in the^other? 
 
 Colorado answers that this is not a suit between private appropriators. This is 
 true, but it does not follow that their situation and what has been accomplished by 
 them for their respective States can be ignored. As respects Wyoming the welfare, 
 prosperity, and hapiness of the people of the larger part of the Laramie Valley, as also 
 a large portion of the taxable resources of two counties, are dependent on the appro- 
 priations in that State. Thus the interests of the State are indissolubly linked with 
 the rights of the appropriators. To the extent of the appropriation and use of the water 
 in Colorado a like situation exists there. 
 
 Colorado further answers that she can accomplish more with the water than Wyo- 
 ming does or can : that she proposes to use it on lands in the Cache la Poundre Valley, 
 and that they with less water will produce more than the lands in the portion of the 
 Laramie Valley known as the Laramie Plains. It is true that irrigation in the Poudre 
 Valley has been carried to a higher state of development than els3whero in the Rocky 
 Mountain region and that the lands of that valley Ue at a lower altitude than do those 
 in the Laramie Plains and generally are better adapted to agriculture. In some 
 parts they also reqiiire less water. It may be assumed that the lands intended to be 
 reclaimed and irrigated in the Poudre Valley conform to the general standard, although 
 this is left uncertain. But for combined farming and stockraising those of the Laramie 
 Plains offer opportunities and advantages which are well recognized. It is to this 
 use that they chiefly are devoted. It is a recognized and profitable industry, has 
 been carried on there for many years and is of general economic value. Many of the 
 original ranchmen still are engaged in it, some on the tracts where they first settled. 
 With the aid of irrigation native hay of a high quality, alfalfa. oats, and other forage 
 are grown for winter feeding, the live stock being grazed most of the year on un irrigated 
 ;< icas and in the neighboring hills and mountains. In this way not only are the irriirat- 
 ed tracts made productive, but the utility and value of the grazing areas are greatly 
 enhanced. The same industry is carried on in the same way in sections of Colorado. 
 In both States this is a purpose for \vhich the right to appropriate water may be exer- 
 cise.], and no discrimination is made between it and other firming. Even in this suit 
 Colorado is a<se*ti:ig appropriations of this class for 4.250 acres in the portion of the 
 Laramie Valley in that State, and is claiming under them an amount of water in excess 
 of what she asserts will irrigate a like acreage in the Poudre Valley. 
 
 Some of the appropriations from the stream in Wyoming are used tor auriculture 
 alone. One of the large projects, dating from territorial days, and constructed at 
 great cost, carries water from the river through a tunnel one-half mile long and canals 
 several miles in length to the Wheat land district, where it is used in irrigating :'/>, 000 
 acres, all of which are very successfully and profitably farmed in small tracts. This 
 project uses one very large and one comparatively small reservoir for storing v, ater and 
 equalizing the natural flow. 
 
 We conclude that Colorado's objections to the doctrine of appropriation as a basis 
 of decision are not well taken, and that it furnishes the onlv basis which is con> >nant 
 with the principles of right and equity applicable to such a controversy as this IB. 
 The cardinal rule of the doctrine is that priority of appropriation gives superiori! 
 right. Hai-h of these States applies and enforces this rule in her own territory, and it 
 is the one to which intending appropriators naturally v.ould turn for guidance. The
 
 42 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASTX. 
 
 principle on which it proceeds is not less applicable to interstate streams and contro- 
 versies than to others. Both States pronounce the rule just and reasonable us applied 
 to the natural conditions jn that region; and to prevent any departure from it the people 
 of 1 "ill incorporated it into their constitutions. It originated in the customs and 
 usages of the people before either State came into existence, and the courts of both 
 hold that their constitutional provisions me to 1 e taken as recognizing the prior usage 
 rather than as creating a new rule. These considerations persuade us that its appliea- 
 tion to such a controversy as is here presented can not be other than eminently just 
 and equitable to all concerned. 
 
 In suits between appropriators from the same stream, but in different States recog- 
 nizing the doctrine of appropriation, the question whether rights under such appro- 
 priations should be judged by the rule of priority has been considered by several 
 courts, State and Federal, and has been unifounly answered in the affirmative. 
 Conant v. Deep Creek Irrigation Co. (23 Utah f>27, 681); Willey v. Decker i 11 Wyo. 
 496, 534-535); Taylor r. Hulett (15 Idaho 265, 271); Howell r. Johnson (89 Fed. 51 
 Hoge r. Eaton (135 Fed. 411): Morris v. Bean i]46 Fed. -123 r. Bean v. Morris (159 
 Fed. 651). One of the cases came to this court, and the judgment below was 
 affirmed. Morris r. Bean (221 U. S. 485.) These decisions, although given in suits 
 between individuals, tend strongly to support our conclusion, for they show that by 
 common usage, as also by judicial pronouncement, the rule of priority is regarded 
 in such States as having the same application to a stream flowing from one of them 
 to another that it has to streams wholly within one of them. 
 
 The remaining questions are largely matters of fact. The evidence is voluminous, 
 some of it highly technical and some quite conflicting. It has all been considered. 
 The reasonable limits of an opinion do not admit of its extended discussion. We 
 must be content to give our conclusions on the main questions and make such refer- 
 ences to and comment on what is evidential as will point to the grounds on which 
 the conclusions on those questions rest: As to minor questions, we can only state 
 the ultimate facts as we find them from the evidence. 
 
 The question first in order, and the one most difficult of solution, relates to the 
 flow of the Laramie River, the common source of supply. The difficulty arises 
 chiefly out of the fact that the flow varies greatly in the course of the year and also 
 from year to year. 
 
 Colorado's evidence, which for convenience we take up first, is din et< d to show- 
 ing the average yearly flow of all years in a considerable period, as if that constituted 
 a proper measure of the available supply. We think it is not a proper measure, and 
 this because of the great variation in the flow. To bo available in a practical s^nse, 
 the supply must be fairly continuous and dependable. No doubt the natural How 
 can be materially conserved and equali/.ed by means of stn:. but this 
 
 has its limitations, both financial and physical. The construction of reservoirs of 
 real capacity is attended with great expense, and unless an adequate return reasonahly 
 can be foreseen the expenditure is not justified and will not be made. The years of 
 high water and those of low do not alternate. Often several of the same kind follow 
 in succession. The evaporation of stored water in Colorado and Wyoming is from 
 5 to 6 feet per year. So, while it generally is practicable to store water in one part 
 of the year for us? in another, or in one year for us^ in the next, it oftn. if not gen- 
 erally, is impracticable to store it for longer periods. All this is recognized elsewhere 
 in Colorado's evidence. One of her principal witnesses said: 
 
 "With re.gard to financial practicability of construction of r -s-rvoii-s on Poudre 
 River capable of conserving extraordinary floods, will state that they call for an 
 expenditure that could be utilized only occasionally. It would be similar to finan- 
 cial proposition of people in Florida preparing to heat their houses in the same man- 
 ner as those in the northern part of the United States. For years of unusually high 
 flow in the Poudre River conservation works to utilize the excess \vat -rs in that 
 stream would have to count on carrying wat<>r over more than one year. The utili/.a- 
 tion of this water means the presence of population on the land: that population must 
 have a living from year to year, and they are not justified in going out on the land 
 and settling to raise a crop only once in three or lour years. Thy must have suffi- 
 cient to make a living from one year to another, and consequently the investment 
 must be such that there can be sufficient water every year to keep th.-s-.- people on 
 the land, and when water can only be conserved once in every three to live years 
 there must be provision for carrying over water or the people can not live. It is a 
 question of population as well as investment. The population has to exist and stay 
 on the ground. From standpoint of investment, conservation of flow such as extreme 
 flow of 1884 would be impractical to the extent that it exceeded the ordinary high 
 year. Of such character would be [also] the floods of 1885, 1900, and 1900, three 
 [four] years in thirty." The witness further said: "Aside from reasons which I have 
 given why reservoirs designed to catch only these rare high water flows of Poudre
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 43 
 
 River are not feasible, it is a fact that no farmer would be able to anticipate the high 
 flow and therefore could not depend at all upon water for irrigation until it reached 
 him. If he undertook to so divert water, it would become a gamble rather than a 
 safe guide for living." 
 
 Another of her witnesses .-aid: 
 
 "The present storage capacity in the Poudre Valley is such that in some years 
 the reservoirs are not all filled, while in some years they are filled and water runs to 
 waste. * * * It would not be possible to inaugurate a scheme in the Poudre Valley 
 to construct reservoirs to store water from one year of high flow to another where such 
 water is the only source of supply, for the reservoirs would have to be constructed 
 to hold the maximum amount, and if the water has to be carried over for three years 
 the average diversion from the reservoir would be only one-third of its capacity, 
 making the cost per acre prohibitive." 
 
 And still another of her witnesses, referring to the unused waters of the Poudre 
 in years of hi<rh flow and also to what is contemplated by the defendants is respect 
 of the Laramie, said: 
 
 "The really dependable water supply of the district : will come from the Laramie 
 River, the amount secured from the Poudre River fluctuating greatly and being used 
 to augment the supply from the Laramie. There will be years when the supply from 
 the Poudre River and its tributaries will be practically nothing. Our plans contem- 
 plate taking all the water that it is possible for us to take from the Laramie River 
 each year. It is possible to get only a certain amount from that river, and I do not 
 believe that we can absolutely depend on more than half the required amount from 
 the Laramie River. The very great floods on that watershed we can not consider 
 because we can not construct works to take care of them." 
 
 In accord with these statements, bearing on what is susceptible of use in actual 
 practice, is further evidence coming from Colorado's witnesses and exhibits to the 
 "effect that, notwithstanding the great need for water in the Poudre Valley and the 
 returns obtained from its use, large amounts of water pass down the stream without 
 use or impounding in the years when the flow exceeds what is termed the average. 
 With the high state of irrigation development in that valley the full capacity of the 
 reservoir system there provided when the proof was taken was 146,655 acre-feet 
 an evidence of the limitation inhering in the practical storage of water from such 
 streams. 
 
 The Cache la Poudre River heads in the same mountain range as does the Laramie 
 and the conditions which make for a pronounced variation in the natural flow are 
 largely the same with both. The following table compiled from data relating to the 
 Cache la Poudre, furnished by Colorado, will be helpful in illustrating the view of 
 the witnesses, and also ours. We add the third and fourth columns. 
 
 in annual net discharge of Cache la Poudre River, April to October, both 
 inclusive, for 30 years. 
 
 [Taken from Colorado's Exhibit 124.] 
 
 Year. 
 
 Run-off 
 in 
 
 acre-feet. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all 
 but 4. 
 
 Year. 
 
 Run-off 
 
 in 
 acre- feet. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all 
 but 4. 
 
 1884 
 
 666 466 
 
 +369 144 
 
 
 1899 
 
 388 591 
 
 +91 269 
 
 + 126 008 
 
 
 4'>."i. 47.1 
 
 
 
 1900 
 
 i7i 57 ; 
 
 + 177 251 
 
 + 211 990 
 
 . . 
 
 
 
 
 1901 
 
 
 
 
 1887 
 
 
 -10 482 
 
 4-24 ".".7 
 
 1902 
 
 
 
 - 1 10, 947 
 
 1888 
 
 1889. . . . 
 
 IVi W> 
 
 -141.35-' 
 I!'- '(!' 
 
 -77 B2S 
 
 1903 
 1904 
 
 31 o 437 
 
 - 17. V.N 
 
 + 18 115 
 
 + 82,567 
 
 1890 
 
 
 To >99 
 
 41 .KU> 
 
 1905 
 
 : ;t;i li.V 
 
 
 + 99 069 
 
 IV.tl. 
 
 
 
 .1 :-!47 
 
 1906 
 
 279 974 
 
 
 + 17 391 
 
 1892 
 
 
 
 
 1907 ... 
 
 386. 224 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1908 
 
 
 -11 I7'i 
 
 9 740 
 
 IV.)} 
 
 309,444 
 
 J-ll? li!.' 
 
 r> vii 
 
 1909 . . 
 
 }vi IK)' 
 
 - I.SS. I'.VI 
 
 
 1895. 
 
 :-'41 .vxi 
 
 -47 17^ 
 
 
 191(1 
 
 1.17 ">1 1 
 
 
 
 H't; 
 
 
 
 -100 24! 
 
 1911 
 
 
 -91.711 
 
 
 1897 
 
 
 
 
 1912 
 
 
 
 
 1,898 
 
 
 
 -90,29$ 
 
 1913 
 
 L'17. 9.V.I 
 
 79.363 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Average 297.322, including all years. 
 
 Average 362,583, omitting 1S84, 1885, 1900, and 1909. 
 
 1 The ref .renre is to the Grieley-Poudre ir.igalion diflrict, one of the defen :
 
 44 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVKR BASIX. 
 
 This table shows that during 30 years 1884 to 1913 the yearly flow of the Cache 
 la Poudre ranged from 15l.*i;;ii to 666,466 acre-feet, that in 16 of the 30 it fell below 
 the average, and that S of the Hi were in immediate succession. Obviously.it is 
 not financially practicable, even by means of reservoirs, to equalize the flow of a 
 stream subject to such variation so that it will have a fairly constant and dependable 
 flow at the average of all years. For further illustration we have taken the average 
 of the 23 years remaining after excluding the 4 described by the witness as extra- 
 ordinary (these being left to take the average of the others) and on that basis have 
 made a computation of the excess and deficiency, which is shown in the fourth 
 column of the table. Even on this basis there were 13 yea is in which the flow \v:is 
 below the average and of these 6 came in immediate succession. In four the de- 
 ficiency exceeded 100,000 acre-feet and of the four only one followed a year in which 
 there was an excess sufficient, if carried over in storage, to cover the deficiency. 
 This suffices to show thaf the average of all years is far from being a proper or safe 
 measure of the available supply. An intending irrigator acquiring a water right 
 based on such a measure would be almost certainly confronted with drought when 
 his need for water was greatest. Crops can not be grown on expectations of average 
 flows which do not come, nor on recollections of unusual flows which have pas-r-d 
 down the stream in prior years. Only when the water is actually applied does the 
 soil respond . 
 
 We have dealt with the matter of the average flow at this length because throughout 
 Colorado's evidence and in her briefs it is treated as if it were a proper measure of 
 the supply available for practical use. It is there applied to the Laramie not only 
 directly, but indirectly by increasing the gauged flow for a particular year or period 
 by percentages derived by comparing the How of the Poudre for that year or period 
 with the average for the 30 years, including those in which the flow was so extra- 
 ordinary that concededly much of it neither was nor could be used. Thus, water 
 which is not part of the available supply is counted in measuring that supply. 
 
 When the evidence was taken, in 1913 and 1914. the Laramie had not been gauged 
 so thoroughly nor for so long a period as had the Cache la Poudre. Such gauging as 
 had occurred had been done at different places in different periods, paitly by the 
 United States Geological Survey, partly by Colorado and partly by Wyoming. Some 
 of the gauging stations were in Colorado, but most were in Wyoming. The latter 
 included Woods, 9 miles north of the State boundary, and the Pioneer Dam, 4 miles 
 north of Woods. The evidence centered largely around the flow and gauging at 
 these places. Colorado's chief witness prepared and presented a table based on data,, 
 drawn from various sources, and bearing on the flow at Woods from April to October, 
 both inclusive, for several years and made this table the principal basis of his te.-ti- 
 mony concerning the flow of the stream in that vicinity. We here reproduce the 
 material part of the table, the third and fourth columns being ours: 
 
 Discharge of Laramie River, Woods, Wyo., April to October, both inclusive, for 9 years. 
 [Taken from Colorado's Exhibit 127.] 
 
 
 
 
 Variance 
 
 
 
 
 Variance 
 
 
 
 Variance 
 
 from 
 
 
 
 Variance 
 
 from 
 
 Year. 
 
 Acre-feet. 
 
 from 
 
 average 
 
 Year. 
 
 Acre-feet. 
 
 from 
 
 average 
 
 
 
 average. 
 
 of all 
 
 
 
 average. 
 
 of all 
 
 
 
 
 but 1899. 
 
 
 
 
 but 1899. 
 
 1895. . . 
 
 220.239 
 
 +21,694 
 
 +45, 730 
 
 1900... 
 
 LMs. lie, 
 
 +49,560 
 
 +73,596- 
 
 1896 
 
 108 022 
 
 -90,523 
 
 66 487 
 
 1911 
 
 IMS 240 
 
 -60,305 
 
 36 269 
 
 1897 
 
 251,074 
 
 + 52,529 
 
 + 76,565 
 
 1912 
 
 213, 407 
 
 + 14,862 
 
 +38,898- 
 
 1898 
 
 117,765 
 
 -80,780 
 
 -56,744 
 
 1913 
 
 99, 221 
 
 -99,324 
 
 -75,288. 
 
 1899 
 
 390,730 
 
 + 192,185 
 
 + 216,221 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Average, 198,533, incluling all years. 
 Average, 174,509, excluding 1899. 
 
 The data covered two widely separated periods, one of six years and the other of 
 three. The witness took the average of the nine years, which he gave as 198,545 
 acre-feet, and made this the basis of further calculations. He estimated that the 
 usual flow for the other months was one-tenth of that for the full year, or, putting it 
 in another way, one-ninth of that from April to October, both inclusive, and on this 
 basis he added to his average 21,945 acre-feet, making 220,490. Consulting the Cache 
 la Poudre table, set forth above, he concluded that the nine years, in combination, fell 
 below the'full average for the 30 years covered by that table, and to bring the 9 years
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 45 
 
 m> to a 30-year average he added 9,510 acre-feet, making 230,000. Some water from 
 Wyoming enters the river between the State boundary and Woods, and for this he 
 deducted 13,000 acre-feet, leaving 217. "00. Then, making a reservation as to Sand 
 Creek, to be considered presently, he concluded that 217,000 acre-feet was the average 
 yearly flow in that section of the river. He called it the "normal" flow, an evident 
 misnomer. Thi* did not include water diverted in Colorado, under recognized Col- 
 orado appropriations, which does not reach Wyoming. 
 
 Even if the computation was to be made along the lines of something approaching 
 a general average, we think the witness's computation and conclusion are subject to 
 objection in particulars which we proceed to state. 
 
 The table shows that the flow for 1899 was extraordinary, so much so that it should 
 have been excluded in computing the average and left to take the general level of 
 the others. Its flow was 2 Hi. 221 acre-feet in excess of their average. The excess 
 added nothing to the available supply that which in practice could be used. The 
 flow for the next year was such that it required no augmentation from 1899. So 
 the inclusion of 1899 in the computation was, in effect, taking what was not available 
 as a measure of what was. The error raised the average of the other years 24,036 acre- 
 feet and was carried into the ultimate conclusion. 
 
 We do not doubt that it was admissible to compare the data relating to the Laramie 
 with that relating to the Cache la Poudre and to give effect to such conclusions as 
 reasonably were to be drawn from the comparison, but we think there was no justifi- 
 cation for the addition which was made to bring the nine years up to the standard 
 of an average year among the 30 covered by the Cache la Poudre table. The addition 
 tended to distort rather than to reflect the available supply. Looking at the Cache la 
 Poudre table, it is evident that the 9 years, in combination, would not have appeared 
 short in flow had the 4 extraordinary years in the 30 been excluded, as they should 
 have been. Besides, a comparison of the two tables shows that the variation in yearly 
 flow in the two streams is not the same and that the difference is such as to preclude 
 a nice calculation such as was here made on the basis of an assumed uniformity. To 
 illustrate: According to one table the flow of the Poudre from April to October, both 
 inclusive^ in 1900 was 85,982 acre-feet in excess of that for the same months in 1899, 
 while according to the other the flow of the Laramie for those months in 1899 was 
 142,625 acre-feet in excess of that for the corresponding period in 1900; and according 
 to one table the flow of the Poudre for those months in 1913 was 73.2 per cent of that 
 for the same part of 1912, while according to the other the flow of the Laramie for those 
 months in 1913 was 46.5 per cent of that for the same part of 1912. 
 
 Assuming that 13,000 acre-feet enter the river from Wyoming between the State 
 boundary and Woods, and are put of the river at the latter point, we think this water 
 should not have been deducte:!. It is part of the supply available to satisfy appro- 
 priations from the stream in Wyoming. 
 
 The witness treated the flow irom April to October, both inclusive, in 1912 as 
 being 213.407 acre-feet, and the flow in the same months in 1913 as being 99.221 acre- 
 feet. In this we think he erred. The evidence establishes that the flow in the first 
 period was not more than 191,820 acre-feet and in the second was not more than 
 94,369. Even with the year 1899 excluded, this error increased the average 3.305 
 acre-feet. 
 
 If we exclude the extraordinary flow of 1899. make the needed correction in the 
 flow of 1912 and 1913. and assume the accuracy of the other data, the average becomes 
 171,204 acre-feet, instead of 198,545. as given by the witness. This requires that the 
 21.945 acre-feet which were added to cover the flow for the five other months be 
 reduced to 19.023. 
 
 When these corrections are made in the witness's data and computation, the result 
 is changed from 217.000 acre-feet to 190.227. 
 
 But we are of opinion that the computation and conclusion of the witness, even 
 when revised in the way we have indicated, are based too much on the average flow 
 and not enough on the unalterable need for a supply which is fairly constant and 
 dependable, or is susceptible of being made so by storage and conservation within 
 practicable limits. 15y this it is not meant that known conditions must be such as 
 give assurance that there will be no deficiency even during long periods, but rather 
 that a supply which is likely to be intermittent, or to be matoii.'lly deficient ;it rela- 
 tively short intervals, does not meet the test of practical availability. As we under- 
 stand it. substantial stability in the supply is essential to successful reclamation and 
 irrigation. The evidence shows that this is so. and it is fully recognized in the litera- 
 ture on the subject. 
 
 The same witness prepared and submitted another table embodying all the data 
 he was able to secure from records of past paging and measurements at Woods. This 
 included three years not shown in the nine-year table. They and their recorded
 
 46 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN". 
 
 flow from April to October, both inclusive, were: 1899, 132,349 acre-feet; 1890, 168,406 
 acre-feet, and 1891, 207,146 acre-feet. The witness pronounced the data for these years 
 less accurate than that for the others, and, while his reason for doing so does not clearly 
 appear, we shall assume he was right. Had the three years been included in the nine- 
 year table that would have reduced the average from 198,545 to 189,371 acre-feet, 
 counting all years, and from 174,509 to 171,066 acre-feet, counting all but 1899. It. 
 however. w r ould not have shown another year with a flow as low as that of 1913, nor i 
 as low as that of 1896. 
 
 Colorado presented other evidence in the way of general estimates, results of very 
 fragmentary gaging, and opinions based on rough measurements of snow-drifts in the 
 mountainous area about the head of the stream; but we put all of this aside as being of 
 doubtful probative value at best and far less persuasive than the evidence we have 
 been discussing. 
 
 Wyoming's evidence was based on the same recorded data that were used by 
 Colorado, and also on actual gaging and measurements by an experienced hydrographer 
 covering the period beginning April 1, 1912, and ending April 30, 1914. Shortly 
 stated, her evidence was to the effect that the actual measured flow at the Pioneer 
 Dam, four miles below Woods, was 198,867 acre-feet from April to December, both 
 inclusive, in ]912. was 109,593 acre-feet for all of 1914 and was 19,181 acre-feet for the 
 first four months of 1914; that the flow for 1912 was somewhat above the average. 
 counting all years; that the flow for 1913 was somewhat more than fifty per cent .of 
 the average, and that the average at Woods and in that vicinity, counting all years, 
 was approximately 200,000 acre-feet. Wyoming's chief witness, the hydrographer. 
 submitted the following table, giving the results of his gaging and measurements at 
 the Pioneer Dam: 
 
 Discharge of Laramie River at Pioneer Dam, near Woods, Wyo, (incln<lii/rj f/lnrsion just 
 above dam by Pioneer Canal) in acre-ful . 
 
 
 1912 
 
 1SJ13 
 
 1914 
 
 January 
 
 
 2 6.50 
 
 3 2-:S 
 
 February . . 
 
 
 2. 356 
 
 3,088 
 
 March . .". 
 
 
 3,296 
 
 4,003 
 
 April . . . . 
 
 .'. "Mi 
 
 rj 'in 
 
 8,807 
 
 Mav. . 
 
 40,643 
 
 38,307 
 
 
 June. . 
 
 91 874 
 
 "li .V.i- 
 
 
 July 
 
 :u ->;:; 
 
 r, 825 
 
 
 August 
 
 7 809 
 
 3 130 
 
 
 September... . . ... 
 
 1 :\\\ 
 
 3,023 
 
 
 October 
 
 6 4.Vi 
 
 :', si.' 
 
 
 November ... . . . 
 
 I 4( 
 
 '.<> 077 
 
 
 December 
 
 
 3,246 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total .... 
 
 198, 867 
 
 109. 593 
 
 19, LSI 
 
 
 
 
 
 The evidence does not permit us to doubt the accuracy of these data. They were 
 obtained by work which is shown to have been painstakenly and conscientiously 
 done by one fully competent to do it. The place at which it was done was well 
 adapted to obtaining accurate results, and the observations were continuous, not 
 merely occasional or intermittent. 
 
 As the gauging did not cover the first three months of 1912, it is necessary to arrive 
 at the flow for those months. The proof shows that the flow for the same months in 
 1914 fairly may be taken for the purpose. That was 10,374 acre-feet, the addition 
 making 209,241 acre-feet for 1912. The flow for 1913 was 109,593 acre-feet. Both 
 should be increased 4,000 acre-feet to cover water diverted between Woods 'and the 
 Pioneer Dam and not returning to the stream above the gauging station. This Drives 
 a total of 213,241 acre-feet for 1912 and 113,593 acre-feet for 1913. Tested by the flow 
 of these years, the available supply would be 163,417 acre-feet; that is to say, on that 
 basis the excess in 1912 would match the deficiency in 1913. But a survey of more 
 than two years is essential in arriving at a fair conclusion respecting the available 
 supply. A year of low flow is not always preceded by one of high or moderate flow as 
 was the case with 1912 and 1913. 
 
 In diverting and applying water in irrigation there is a material loss through evapo- 
 ration, seepage, and otherwise which is inavoidable. The amount varies according 
 to the conditions chiefly according to the distance the water is carried through canals/^ 
 and ditches and the length of time it is held in storage. Where the places of use are* 
 in the same watershed and relatively near the stream, as is true of the lands on the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 47 
 
 Laramie Plains served by the greater part of the Wyoming appropriations, a substantial 
 amount of water percolates back into the stream from irrigated areas and becomes 
 available for further use lower down the stream. This is called return water. The 
 amount varies considerably, and there is no definite data on the subject. As respects 
 irrigation on the Laramie Plains above the Wheatland diversion, the evidences 
 es us that the return water will certainly more than counterbalance the loss 
 throughout evaporation and otherwise when the period of storage is not more than from 
 one year to the next. 
 
 What has now been said covers the substance of the evidence, as we regard it, bear- 
 ing on the available supply at Woods and in that vicinity: that is to say, the supply 
 remaining after the recognized Colorado appropriations are satisfied. 
 
 We already have indicated that, as to such a stream as this, the average flow of all 
 years, high and low. can not be taken as a proper or reasonable measure of what is 
 available for practical use. What th^n is the amount which is available here? Ac- 
 cording to the general consensus of opinion among practical irrigators and experi- 
 enced irrigation engineers, the lowest natural flow of the years is not the test. In 
 practice they proceed on the view that within limits, financially and physically 
 feasible, a fairlv constant and dependable flow materiallv in excess of the lowest may 
 generally be obtained by means of reservoirs adapted to conserving and equalizing 
 the natural flow; and we regard this view as reasonable. 
 
 But Wyoming takes the position that she should not be required to provide storage 
 facilities in order that Colorado may obtain a larger amount of water from the common 
 supply than otherwise would be possible. In a sense this is true; but not to the extent 
 of requiring that the lowest natural flow be taken as the test of the available supply. 
 The question here is not what one State should do for the other, but how each should 
 exercise her relative rights in the waters of this interstate stream. Both are interested 
 in the stream and both have great need for the water. Both subscribe to the doctrine 
 of appropriation, and by that doctrine rights to water are measured by what is reason- 
 ably required and applied. Both States reco?nize that conservation within practi- 
 cable limits is essential in order that needless waste may be prevented and the largest 
 feasible use may be secured. This comports with the all-pervading spirit of the doc- 
 trine of appropriation and takes appropriate heed of the natural necessities out of 
 which it arose. We think that doctrine lays on each of these States a duty to exercise 
 her right reasonably and in a manner calculated to conserve the common supply. 
 Notwithstanding her present contention. Wyoming has in fact proceeded on this 
 line, for, as the proof shows, her appropriators, with her sanction, have provided and 
 have in service reservoir facilities which are adapted for the- purpose and reasonably 
 sufficient to meet'its requirements. 
 
 There is one respect, requiring mention, in which Colorado's situation differs ma- 
 teriallv from that of Wyoming. The water to satisfy the Colorado appropriations 
 is, and in the nature of things must be. diverted in Colorado at the head of the stream; 
 and because of this those appropriations will not be a/fected by any variation in 
 the yearly flow, but will receive their full measure of water in all years. On the 
 other hand, the Wyoming appropriations will receive the water only after it passes 
 down into that Stale, and must bear whatever of risk is incident to the variation in 
 the natural flow. Of course, this affords no reason for underestimating the available 
 supply, but it does show that to overestimate it will work particular injury to Wyo- 
 ming. 
 
 The lowest established flow was that of 1913. There is no claim or proof that in 
 any other year the flow fell so low. Had there been others some proof of it doubtless 
 would have been presented. This is also true of the very low flow of 1896. There- 
 fore we think it reasonably may be assumed that the flow of those years was so ex- 
 ceptional that it is not likelv to recur save at long intervals. 
 
 We conclude, in view of all the evidence and of the several considerations we have 
 stated, that the natural and vardn-r flow of this stream at Woods, which is after the 
 recogized Colorado appropriations are satisfied, is susceptible by means of prac-. 
 ticable storage and conservation of being converted into a fairly constant and depend 
 able flow of 170,000 acre-feat per year, but not more. This we hold to be the avail 
 able supply at that paint after the recognized Colorado diversions are made. The 
 amount may scorn large, but, considering what naav be accomplished with practicable 
 storage f i -ilitie-, such a* are already prodded, and the use which may be made of the 
 return water, we are persuaded that the amount, while closely pressing the outside 
 limit, is not too lar. 
 
 131G 22 PT! 4
 
 liKVKLOP.MEXT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 The problem to be worked out in obtaining a fairly dependable supply in that 
 amount is measurably illustrated by the following table covering all the years for 
 which the evidence supplies the requisite data, the flow during the missing months 
 being fairly estimated: 
 
 Year. 
 
 Acre- feet. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 average 
 of all 
 but 1899. 
 
 Variance 
 from 
 170,000. 
 
 1889 
 
 151,349 
 
 56,893 
 
 -38,576 
 
 -18 651 
 
 1890 
 
 187,406 
 
 -20.836 
 
 -2, 519 
 
 +17,408 
 
 1891 
 
 226,146 
 
 + 17,904 
 
 +36,221 
 
 +56, 146 
 
 1895 
 
 239. 239 
 
 +30,997 
 
 + 49,314 
 
 +69,239 
 
 1896 
 
 127, 022 
 
 -81,220 
 
 -62,903 
 
 -42,978 
 
 1897 . 
 
 270,074 
 
 +61,831 
 
 + 80,149 
 
 + 100.074 
 
 1898 
 
 136, 765 
 
 -71.477 
 
 -53, IfiO 
 
 -33,235 
 
 1899 ' 
 
 409, 730 
 
 +201,488 
 
 - 219,805 
 
 +239,730 
 
 1900 
 
 267, 105 
 
 + 58,863 
 
 + 77,180 
 
 +97, 105 
 
 1911 
 
 157, 240 
 
 -51,002 
 
 -32,685 
 
 -12,760 
 
 1912 
 
 213 241 
 
 + 4,999 
 
 +2}, 316 
 
 + 43,241 
 
 1913 
 
 113,593 
 
 -94, 649 
 
 -76,332 
 
 -56,047 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Average 298.242, including all years. 
 Average 189,925, including all years but 1899. 
 
 It of course is true that the variation in the flow will not always be just what it 
 was in the years covered by the table, and yet the data obtained by the gaging and 
 measurements in those years show better than anything else what reasonably may 
 be expected in the future. We recognize that the problem which the table is in- 
 tended to illustrate is not a simple one and that to work it out will involve the exer- 
 cise of both skill and care. But in this it is not unlike other problems of similar 
 moment. Our belief gathered from all the evidence is that, with the attention which 
 rightly should be bestowed on a problem of such moment, it can be successfully solved 
 within the limits of what is financially and physically practicable. 
 
 As to Sand Creek. Colorado's witness regarded it as a tributary of the river and 
 estimated its yearly flow at 17.000 acre-feet. The creek rises in Colorado, extends 
 into the Laramie Plains in Wyoming, and discharges into Button Lake, a few miles 
 from the river. In exceptional years about one in five the waters of the creek 
 overflow the lake for a short period and find their way over the prairie into the river, 
 Otherwise the river receives no water from the creek. The proof of this is direct 
 and undisputed. The creek is nominally a tributary of the river, but only that. 
 Besides, its flow does not appear to have been measured. The witness merely esti- 
 mated it at what he thought would be the natural run-off of the adjacent territory. 
 Other evidence suggests that the estimate is too high, but this we need not consider. 
 A substantial part of the flow is diverted, through what is known as the Divide Ditch, 
 for use in irrigating lands in Colorado, and the evidence suggests, if it does not estab- 
 lish, that existing appropriations in the two States take the entire flow. For these 
 reasons the waters of this creek can not be regarded as a factor in this controversy. 
 
 After passing Woods, and while traversing the territory wherein are the Wyoming 
 appropriations with which we are concerned, the Laramie receives one large and 
 some very small additions to its waters. 
 
 The large addition comes from the Little Laramie. a stream whose source and 
 entire length are in Wyoming. Its natural now is a little more than one-half of that 
 of the main stream at Woods and is subject to much the same variations. Part of its 
 flow is used under appropriations along its course and the remainder passes into the 
 main stream. Including what is appropriated along its course, and excluding minor 
 contributions by small creeks after it gets well away from its headwaters, we think 
 the amount available for practical use is 93.0CO acre-feet per year. 
 
 None of the small tributaries, whether of the Laramie or the Little Laramie. adds 
 much to the available supply. Their natural flow is small. As to some it is all used 
 under old appropriations: as to some it is partly used under such appropriations; 
 and as to some it is only seasonal, the channels being dry much of the year. Some 
 creeks spoken of in Colorado's evidence as tributaries are otherwise shown not to be 
 such, but to deliver their waters into lak( s or ponds not connected with either of the 
 principal streams. Colorado's evidence also takes into account some tributaries which 
 discharge into the Laramie below the points of diversion of all the Wyoming appro- 
 priations with which we are concerned. One, of which much is said in the evidence, 
 is the Svbille. It reaches the Laramie below the diversion for the Wheatland Dis-
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 49 
 
 trict ''the lowest diveision we are to consider;, but in its course passes through that 
 district. A small part of its flow is used in that district and it is not practicable to 
 use more. What is used should, for present purposes, be treated as if it reached the 
 Laramie above the \\hcatland diversion. Wyoming contends that none of these 
 small tributaries, other than the Sybille. contributes any dependable amount to the 
 available supply. We think there is in the aggregate a fairly dependable contribu- 
 tion of 25.000 acre-feet, but not more. 
 
 It results that, in ovir opinion, the entire supply available for the proposed Colorado 
 appropriation and the Wyoming appropriations down to and including the diversion 
 for the Wheatland district is 288.000 acre-feet. 
 
 In contending for a larger finding, Colorado points to the issue by Wyoming's State 
 engineer of permits, so-called, for appropriations in excess of that amount and insists 
 that these permits constitute solemn adjudications by that officer that the supply is 
 adequate to cover them. But in this the nature of the permits is misapprehended. 
 In fact and in law they are not adjudications but mere licenses to appropriate if the 
 requisite amount of water be there. As to many nothing ever is done under them by 
 the intending appropriators. In such cases there is no appropriation; and even in. 
 others the amount of the appropriation turns on what is actually done under the 
 permit. In late years the permits relating to these streams have contained a pro- 
 vision, saying: "The records of the State engineer's office show the wateis of [the 
 particular stream] to be largely appropriated. The appropriator under the permit is 
 hereby notified of this fact, and the issuance of this permit grants only the right to 
 divert and use the surplus of waste water of the stream and confers no rights which 
 will interfere with or impair the use of water by prior appropriators." It therefore 
 is plain that these permits have no such probative force as Colorado seeks to have 
 attributed to them. 
 
 Colorado also comments on the amount of water stored in Wyoming reservoirs in 
 1912 and seeks to draw from this an inference that the available supply was greater 
 than we have indicated. But the inference is not justified, and for these reasons: 
 First, a part of what was stored wa* dead water: that is. was below the level from which 
 water could be drawn off and conducted to the places of use. This is a matter com- 
 monly experienced in the selection and use of reservoir sites. Secondly, the flow of' 
 1912 wa* above what could be depended on and prudence required that a substantial 
 part be carried over to meet a possible shortage in the succeeding year. And, thirdly, 
 the evidence shows that in 1912 the storing process was improvidently carried to a 
 point which infringed the rights of small appropriators who were without storage 
 fa'ilities. 
 
 The available supply the 288,000 acre-feet is not sufficient to satisfy the Wyoming 
 appropriations dependent thereon and also the proposed Colorado appropriation, so 
 it becomes necessary to consider their relative priorities. 
 
 There are some existing Colorado appropriations having priorities entitling them to 
 precedence over many of the Wyoming appropriations. These recognized Colorado 
 appropriations are, 18,000 acre-feet for what is known as the Skyline Ditch and 4.250 
 acre-feet for the irrigation of that number of acres of native-hay meadows in the Lara- 
 mie Valley in Colorado, the 4,250 acre-feet being what Colorado's chief witness testifies 
 is reasonably required for the purpose, although a larger amount is claimed in the 
 State's answer. These recognized Colorado appropriations, aggregating 22,250 acre- 
 feet, are not to be deducted from the 288,000 acre-feet, that being the available supply 
 after they are satisfied. Xor is Colorado's appropriation from Sand Creek to be 
 deducted, that creek, as we have shown, not being a tributary of the Laramie. 
 
 The proposed Colorado appropriation which is in controversy here, is spoken of in 
 the evidence as the Laramie-Poudre Tunnel diversion and is part of an irrigation 
 project known as the Laramie-Poudre project. Colorado insists that this proposed 
 appropriation takes priority, by relation, as of August 25. 1902, and Wyoming that 
 the priority can relate only to the latter part of 1909. The true date is a matter of 
 importance, because some lanre irrigation works were started in Wyoming between 
 the dates mentioned, were diligently curried to completion, and are entitled to priori- 
 ties as of the dates when they were started. 
 
 The Laramie-Poudre project is composed of several units, originally distinct, which 
 underwent many changes before they were brought together in a single project. In 
 its final form the project is intended to divert water by means of a tunnel from the 
 Laramie River into the Poudre watershed, there to unite that water with water taken 
 from the Cache la Poudre River and then to convey the water many miles to the lower 
 part of the Poudre Valley, where it is to be used in reclaiming and irrigating a body 
 of land containing 125.000 acres. It is a large and ambitious project whose several 
 parts, as finally brought together, are adjusted to the attainment of that purpose. 
 The parts were separately conceived, each having a purpose of its own. The project 
 now is intended to draw on two independent sources of supply, each in a separate
 
 50 DKYKLOP.MKXT OF LOWER COLORADO UIVF.K P.ASIX. 
 
 watershed. 1 The appropriations are necessarily distinct. Neither adds anything to, 
 nor subtracts anything from, the status of the other. We are concerned with only one 
 of them. 
 
 The proposed tunnel diversion from the Laramie was conceived as a possibility by 
 Wallace A. Link in 1897 and was explained by him to Abraham I. Akin in the spring 
 of 1902. Later in the year they visited the headwaters of the two streams, looked over 
 the ground, and agreed that Link's idea was a good one, that the undertaking was 
 large, and that they Avere without the means to carry it through. They concluded to 
 promote the project together, and, thinking their chance-; of success would be im- 
 proved by it, they also concluded to construct a ditch, known as the Upper Rawah, 
 from the Laramie \ 'alley to a connection with an existing ditch, called the Skyline, 
 and to take water through these ditches into the <'a<-he la Pmidre Valley and there 
 sell it. By this they hoped to demonstrate that water wa< obtainable from that 
 source and to obtain money to be used in promoting their project. The' Skyline was 
 a fair-sized ditch leading over a low part of the divide to a branch of the Poudre, and 
 they arranged with its owner for the carriage, on a percentage l>u-is, of water from 
 their ditch when constructed. They also conceived that the ditch could be used 
 advantageously in collecting and carrying water to be sent through the tunnel if and 
 when the tunnel diversion was effected. In 1902, beginning August iT>, they surve;, ed 
 the line of the Rawah, and in October of that year filed a statement of claim under 
 it in the State engineer's office. In the statement they said nothing about a tunnel 
 diversion and made claim only to the amount of water expected to be carried through 
 the Rawah and to the use of certain lakes or natural reservoirs for storage purj' 
 No work was done on the ditch that year. In 1903 they cleared some of the land over 
 which it was to run, but did no excavating. In 1904 they constructed (>,000 feet of the 
 ditch and did more clearing. No work was done on it in 1905 or 1906. Further work 
 was done in 1907, and some washouts were repaired in 1903. That was the last work 
 on the Rawah. Much more than one-half of the ditch was left unconsinicted. Xo 
 water was delivered through it to the Skyline, nor was any sold or used. Nothing 
 appears to have been done with the lakes or natural reservoirs. 
 
 . In 1903 Link and Akin gave to each of three others a one-fifth share in their 
 project, in return for which the new partners were to carry on solicitations to get 
 capitalists interested and to raise money. The results of the solicitations were disap- 
 pointing, but some investors were brought in and became concerned about the pre- 
 liminary plans. Differences of opinion arose and had to be dealt with. The plans 
 were examined and reexamined, alternative modes and places of diversion were 
 considered and investigated, particular features were eliminated and others added, 
 and in 1909, but not before, the project was definitely brought into its present form. 
 A short reference to some of the details will serve to make this plain. 
 
 In the upper Rawah filing of October, 1902, nothing was said about the proposed 
 tunnel diversion, but a claim was made to the use of certain lakes or natural reser- 
 voirs described as having an aggregate capacity of 325,000,000 cubic feet. The 
 tunnel diversion was merely a mental conception until 1904. In March of that year 
 a survey was made of a tunnel site, a ditch from the west fork of the Laramie to the 
 east fork, and a channel reservoir on the east fork above the tunnel site; and in May 
 following a statement of clain under them was filed, in which the estimated cost of the 
 tunnel and ditch was given as $189,200 and that of the reservoir as $20,000. Later in 
 1904 a survey was made of a tunnel site, three collecting ditches, and two pipe lines, 
 and in October of that year a statement of claim under them was filed, in which 
 the estimated cost of the tunnel, ditches, and pipe lines was given as ?375,000. The 
 location and dimensions of the tunnel in the second survey differed from those in the 
 first. The difference was not pronounced, and yet was a real change. In September, 
 1906, another statement of claim was filed covering the upper Rawah ditch, the lakes 
 connected therewith, and the tunnel. This statement declared that the lakes were 
 to be so enlarged that they would have an aggregate capacity of 1.2-">0,000.000 cubic 
 feet, instead of 325,000,000 as stated in the filing of 1902; and if again changed the loca- 
 tion and dimensions of the tunnel this time more than before. 
 
 In 1905 and 1906 surveys were made to find a route for an open canal from the 
 Laramie around the mountains, through a portion of Wyoming and back to Colorado, 
 which would avoid the construction of a tunnel and the maintenance of ditches in 
 the higher mountain levels; and in 1908 a statement of claim covering such a canal 
 
 1 An eiv-il'ieer who had been cwnccte 1 with the work and was a witness tar the defendants, said: ''This 
 svUem hi it .vo distinct, an lin lep.'nient s mrc-os of supply; that from the Laramie River and that from the 
 Poudre River Basin an i the tributaries of the South Plalte. and it was sode-igncd thai the Poudre Valley 
 Canal couH divert water from the P.uidre River and also from the northern tributaries of the Poudre inter- 
 c 'pie 1 by the canal ani from the tributaries of the South PIu' ti as Crow Creek and intercepted 
 
 by the canal wherever there was surnlus water. We estimated that the amount of water available out side 
 of the Laramie River source would be between so.000 and 100.000 acre-feet per annum as an average. "
 
 DE\ 7 ELOPMEXT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 51 
 
 was filed, as was also a claim covering a large channel reservoir nine miles down the 
 stream from the tunnel site. The estimated cost of the canal was given as $1,000,000 
 and that of the reservoir as $200,000. The plan evidenced by these filings was that 
 of impounding the water in the reservoir and liberating it in an equalised flow into 
 the canal, which was to carry it into the Poudre watershed without the aid of a tunnel. 
 Late in 1908 and in the fore part of 1909 another survey along the same general line 
 and with the same purpose was made at a cost of $15,000. Early in 1909 a statement 
 of claim was filed covering a proposed reservoir near the tunnel site, the cost being 
 estimated at $200,000. 
 
 In 1907 the Laramie-Poudre Reservoirs and Irrigation Co. succeeded to whatever 
 rights the promoters had acquired up to that time, and all subsequent surveys, in- 
 vestigations, and filings were made by it. In April, 1909, the Greeley- Poudre irriga- 
 tion district, within which the water is intended to be used, was organized. At 
 that time sufficient capital had not been obtained to carry the project through in any 
 form. In September following the irrigation company and the irrigation district the 
 entered into a tentative contract, under which the company was to consummate the 
 project in its present form, and, after doing the construction work, was to transfer the 
 property to the district. Payment therefor was to be made in interest-bearing bonds 
 of the district. By a vote taken the next month, the district ratified the contract and 
 authorized the issue of the bonds. About the last of that month the work of boring 
 the tunnel and making the diversion was begun. 
 
 It is manifest from this historical outline that the question of whether, and also 
 how, this proposed appropriation should be made remained an open one until the 
 contract with the irrigation district was made and ratified in 1909. Up to that time 
 the whole subject was at large. There was no fixed or definite plan. It was all in an 
 inceptive and formative stage investigations being almost constantly in progress to 
 del ermine its feasibility and whether changes and alternatives should be adopted 
 rather than the primary conception. It had not reached a point where there was 
 fixed and definite purpose to take it up-and carry it through. An appropriation does 
 not take priority by relation as of a time anterior to the existence of such a purpose. 
 
 It no doubt is true that the original promoters intended all along to make a large 
 appropriation from the Laramie by some means, provided the requisite capital could 
 be obtained, but this is an altogether inadequate basis for applying the doctrine of 
 relation. 
 
 Xo separate appropriation was effected by what was done on the upper Hawaii ditch. 
 The purpose to use it in connection with the Skyline was not carried out, but aban- 
 doned. This, as Link testified, was its "principal" purpose. The purpose to make 
 it an accessory of the large project was secondary and contingent. Therefore the work 
 on it can not be taken as affecting or tolling back the priority of that project. 
 
 Actual work in making the tunnel diversion was begun as before shown, about the 
 last of October, 1909. Thereafter it was prosecuted with much diligence and in 1911, 
 when this suit was brought, it had been carried so nearly to a state of completion that 
 the assumption reasonably may be indulged that, but for the suit, the appropriation 
 soon would have been perfected. We conclude that the appropriation should be 
 accorded a priorty by relation as of the latter part of October, 1909, when the work 
 was t>egun. 
 
 Applying a like rule to the Wyoming appropriations, several of them must be 
 treated as relating to later dates, and therefore as being junior to that appropriation. 
 Some of the projects in that State are founded on a plurality of appropriations, a part 
 of which are senior and a part junior to that one. 
 
 The evidence shows that the Wyoming appropriations having priorities senior to 
 the one in Colorado, and which are dependent on the available supply before named, 
 cover 181,500 acres of land and that the amount of water appropriated and reasonably 
 required for the irrigation of these lands is 272,500 acre-feet. A much larger amount 
 is claimed, but our finding restricts the amount to what the evidence shows is reasona- 
 bly required, which is one acre-foot per a< re for the larger part of the lands, two acre- 
 feet per acre for a part and two and one-half acre feet per acre for the remainder. 
 
 As the available supply is 288,000 acre-feet and the amount covered by senior 
 appropri-.il ions in \Vyoming is 272,500 acre-feet, there remain 15.500 acre- fed which 
 ore subject to this junior appropriation in Colorado. The amount sought to be diverted 
 and taken under it is much larger. 
 
 A decree will accordingly lie entered enjoining the defendants from diverting or 
 taking more than 15,500 acre-feet per year from the Laramie River by means of or 
 through the so-called Laramie-Poudre project- 
 It is so ordered. 
 
 A t rue copy. 
 
 Test: , 
 
 Cleric, Supreme Court, U. S.
 
 52 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 COMMITTEE ox IRRICATIOX OF AI:II> LAXDS, 
 
 HOUSE OK RKPKKSKXTATTVES. 
 
 Junt !1. 198*. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m.. Hon. Nicholas J. SinnoU presiding. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. This meeting was called this morning for the purpose of hearing 
 Mr. Hoover, who is chairman of the Colorado River Commission that examined into ( 
 the matter we are considering. We will be glad to hear you. Mr. Secretary. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. HERBERT C. HOOVER, SECRETARY OF 
 
 COMMERCE. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Mr. Chairman, I assume the committee is quite familiar with 
 the physiographic character of the river, the topography, and the problems that are 
 presented. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. We have had considerable testimony on those points. 
 Secretary HOOVER. It can be expressed in very few words, that the Colorado River 
 drains portions of seven States: that the volume of flow of the river varies seasonally 
 during the year from somewhere between five to six thousand second-feet up to 
 200,000 second-feet, while it. varies in total quantity of discharge from fl.OCO.CI acre- 
 feet per annum up to 26.COO.OCO acre-feet in different years. The irrigation work now 
 in progress in the lower river has absorbed the whole flow of the river at low water, 
 and therefore further extension of irrigation is estopped, unle.-s sioiage of the flocd 
 flow is undertaken. From the storage point of view the river is unique. The amount 
 of additional acreage in the United States that can be brought under irrigation in the 
 upper and lower river can be extended by between four and six million acres, a 
 against perhaps under 3.COO.OOO acres now under irrigaticn. Furthermore, the spring 
 floods now endanger the land under irrigation, and the problem is also one of storage 
 for control purposes. 
 
 The Colorado River Commission, of which I am the chairman, and on which I 
 represent the Federal Government, was established by legislation in the seven States 
 and by the Federal Government looking in the first instance to an agreement that 
 would prevent legal conflict between the different States in the basin over the use of 
 water. The legislation establishing the commission in some of the States also implies 
 that the commission should give consideration to a definite plan for the development 
 of the river as a whole, both from the legal and economic phases and also from the 
 engineering point of view. But whether that is expressed or not it is implied, because 
 there can be no settlement of the legal rights of the different States that did not embrace 
 the contemplation of storage along the river. The only hope of securing further devel- 
 opment and the application of the waters to their maximum use is through storage. 
 Therefore it is impossible to discuss the question of interstate water rights without 
 discussing it in the phase of storage. 
 
 The commission is endeavoring to develop an adjustment of the interstate rights 
 to the water, and will probably offer some recommendations as to a long-view program 
 for the development of the river. 
 
 On the legal side it is proposed that an agreement should be entered into between 
 the seven States and the Federal Government establishing the rights of the seven 
 States to their participation in the water, and that that agreement, if it meets the 
 approval of the legislatures of the seven States and the Federal Government, will 
 become statutory law with respect to the basin. 
 
 There are no agreements yet reached in that phase of the matter. The commission 
 reassembles to consider it fdrther on the 1st of August at Santa Fe. In the meantime 
 the recent decision of the United States Supreme Court has considerably advanced 
 the whole conception of interstate water rights. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. You speak of the Wyoming-Colorado case'. 1 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes: the Wyoming-Colorado case. That decision, perhaps, 
 simplifies the issues, because it fairly definitely establishes interstate rights to the 
 water by priority of beneficial use. 
 
 In the considerations by the commission of this question, which has lasted over 
 some months and has involved public hearings at various points in the basin, the 
 engineering problems, of course, have been constantly in the minds of the commission 
 and the public generally who have appeared before the commission. 
 
 The most pressing of these problems is the control of the annual freshets on the 
 river, not only from the point of view of storage but from the point of view of safety /> 
 to the people of the lower river. The Imperial Valley and the Arizona districts are { 
 in great danger at the present time, and it becomes vital that control of the freshets 
 shall be established. Almost at any moment in one of these freshets the Imperial
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER 'COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 53 
 
 Valley may be drowned out by the breaking of the river into the Salton Sea. So 
 imminent has the danger become to the valley that the people in that area are now 
 having difficulty in obtaining mortgages and other loans to carry on their business. 
 
 The banks throughout the southern part of California have become fearful that action 
 may not be taken by the Government in time to assure the safety of the large invest- 
 ment3 already mada, and the paople are finding a groat deal of difficulty to finance 
 themsalves. 
 
 I mention this as an indication of the pressing emergency of the situation and the 
 necessity for early action. 
 
 In the various discussions before and in the commission, consideration has been 
 given to the question of at what pirticular point storage should be first established, 
 so as to fall into any plan of a Ion ,' view program that might extend over two centtiri.-s, 
 for whatever is done in this situation should be done in the long view. We have in this 
 river the advantage of a practically virgin situation that can be considered from the 
 point of view of broad mtional development with a definite, well-considered program . 
 
 Although there may be many views as to secondary steps in development, they can 
 be neglected at the pro-nut time. However, without the commission having gone on 
 to any particular record in the matter, I think all of the members of the commission 
 are in agreement that tha first step is the construction of a large storage dam somewhere 
 in the neighborhood of Boulder Canyon. There may be some questions of founda- 
 tions that may shift the site of that dam 15 or 20 miles. I believe the great majority 
 of engineering and public view does not question that this is the first step. 
 
 The reasons for coming to this conclusion are, first, the immediate importance of 
 control of flood flow, the large and cheap storage provided at this site, and the prob- 
 ability of an early development of a power market. The location of the dam at or near 
 Boulder Canyon, as against projected dams farther up the river, has been disputed by 
 some, but inasmuch as Boulder Canyon is some 150 miles nearer to a power market, 
 and as the sale of power will be ultimately necessary in order to establish a substratum 
 to finance the operation, that reason alone would seem convincing as to the location of 
 the dam at that point . 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How far from the Boulder Canyon is the first extended area of land that 
 would be irrigable? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I should think probably 130 or 150 miles below. 
 
 Some who have advocated a dam at the next practical site, some 250 miles farther 
 up the river, look at it solely from the engineering point of view rather than from the 
 point of view of the economics of the problem. I do not know whether it is necessary 
 to go into that question in any detail; if so. the engineers of the Irrigation Service can 
 no doubt inform the committee with a great deal more detail than I can . 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. What do you mean by the economics of the problem? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The availability of the power market, and the fact that the dam at 
 the lower site would control a larger degree of possible freshet than dams farther up the 
 river, and that that location of a dam below does not at all interfere with the subsequent 
 development of other dams above. There is a legal phase in the problem in the devel- 
 opment of the river that must be taken into consideration. That is the fact that the 
 lands which are likely first to come into irrigation, on the present return from irrigated 
 lands, the ones most easily financed are those in the lower part of the basin. A larger 
 amount of land in the upper basin will no doubt be brought into irrigation at later 
 limes. Therefore, the States in the upper basin have been anxious that there should 
 be no water rights established by storage or prior beneficial use in the lower basin that 
 will interfere with their ultimate development above. In other words, that as a result 
 of the works in the lower basin there should be no limitations of the possibilities of 
 bringing their land into fruitful development. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. What do you mean by the lower and upper basins? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. We generally speak of California and Arizona as the lower basin, 
 as distinguished from Colorado. Nevada, I" tali. New Mexico, and Wyoming in the 
 upper basin. These lands in here [indicating on map lands in southern California 
 and Arizona], will come into play first being the easier of development. The ultimate 
 earnings of the land farther north may be equal to those below, but their development 
 will be slower. That has been the history of most streams, so far as I know, that is, the 
 first lands to be brought into irrigation are the lands in the lower river. I raise this 
 matter because it is a very pressing question to the Stales in the upper basin. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Is the controversy pending among iho seven States as to the division 
 of the water and the location of the dam? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I do not think there is division of opinion that the most urgent 
 dam is needed in the neighborhood of Boulder Canyon. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then the only question is as to the division of storage water?
 
 54 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The question in llie minds of the upper ha t sin is that the con- 
 struction of a dam below them at Boulder Canyon would establish a water right under 
 the practice of the Western States that the actual storage of water creates the right to 
 use the water. That is, they might by such a beneficial application be compelled 
 to allow the flow of the water into the dam at the sacrifice of their own lands. The 
 commission is endeavoring to solve that problem. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. They want to save this question of prior right? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. They think there might be established a prior right limiting 
 the development, of their lands. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In other words, I gather from your first statement that this water can 
 not be used now, but it must be in process of storage either in the upper part of the 
 river or below. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The problem of the retention of a right to the water by the States 
 in the upper basin is not insoluble, because the total flow and storage possibilities of 
 the river along its entire course are probably sufficient to irrigate all of the land that 
 can ever be brought under irrigation. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then is it your view in that connection that this legislation should go 
 forward, notwithstanding the fact that the commission has not finally determined, 
 or that the States have not acted upon whatever recommendations the commission 
 has agreed Upon? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I think the legislation should go forward, because the emer- 
 gency of the situation in the Imperial Valley requires almost immediate action in 
 the control of the river and distinguishes it from any other question. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. It would not in any way affect the adjustment of the matter before 
 the commission. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I do not think the States of the lower basin would raise any 
 objection to a provision in the. bill that the creation of this storage in itself created no 
 water rights as against the upper States. I believe that the feeling in the upper States 
 could be relieved by a provision that the erection of the dam did not create the water 
 rights as against them, with full provision for their protection. Some such action 
 should remove any legitimate objection to immediately proceeding with the con- 
 struction. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That being the case, the Government proceeding to construct the 
 Boulder Creek dam, under the law applicable to the first appropriation of the water 
 in the Western States, would that in any way permit or authorize a larger construction 
 if, eventually, the water was taken above? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. No; I think we are all pretty well agreed that there is a suffi- 
 ciency of water for the whole basin, even in long-view development. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. The point is to impound the whole backwater at flood stage, is it 
 not? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. When the gates to the dam are closed, to what extent would it protect 
 the flow of the river? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The capacity of the projected dam would be equal, I think, 
 to the flow of the entire river for a period of something less than two years. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. It would hold practically the entire river? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. For a period of two years, if you wanted to do it. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. You spoke of inserting a provision in this bill which would safe- 
 guard the rights of the States upstream by abrogating the law of appropriation as it. 
 now exists in so far as the Boulder Canyon dam is concerned, bo you not find 
 difficulty in now determining what the ultimate irrigation possibilities are within 
 the seven interested States? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes; the several States are not in any very close agreement as 
 to what the actual acreage is that they will be able to ultimately develop. Taking 
 the view of the Reclamation Service, there is apparently, with a careful development 
 of the river, enough water for all. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It has been suggested that an agreement should be made among the 
 States of the Colorado River Basin that for the next 20 or 30 years any irrigation 
 development, which takes place on that stream shall not create a prior right to the use 
 of water. In other words, that the doctrine of priority would not apply as between 
 all lands brought under irrigation during the period thus agreed upon, but that all 
 appropriations of water should be considered as of even date. At the end of this 
 period of years each State would be better able to determine j ust how much land ( ould 
 be irrigated and they could then agree upon an equitable division of the water. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The commission has come to no conclusion as yet. The theme 
 that seems to meet with more general approval than any other is that each State could 
 proceed with its development up to the absorption of a certain number of acre-feet
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 55 
 
 per annum, leaving a considerable residue of the river unappropriated ; that at some 
 future period, 25 or 50 years hence, they should again assemble and discuss what 
 would be done with the remainder, thus <ji\ing an ample period to work out the rela- 
 tive participation of the different States, based upon the relative amount of land 
 which they could bring into irrigation. 
 
 .Mr. HAYDEN. Is there any conflict, not only as to the area of land that may be 
 irrigated, but as to the allocation among the States of power developed on the Colorado 
 River? 
 
 S ( -c ret an 1 1 o < > \ K H . I do not think there is any intrinsic dispute about that question, 
 because there is a general realization that power must be sold where it can bring a 
 return. There is also the realization that the river at its maximum development, 
 perhaps will produce five or six million horsepower, so the production of five or six 
 hundred thousand horsepower at Boulder Canyon is not the ultimate end or limit 
 of what can be secured. I do not believe you will find there is much anxiety about 
 that question. What there was anxiety about is a matter which will undoubtedly 
 be established in the agreement of the commission, and this is, that there shall be a 
 priority of agriculture over the use for power. 
 
 $Ir. LITTLE. Is it intended that- Federal legislation shall cover that? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. My feeling about the present Federal legislation is that it needs 
 to be confined purely to the question of the erection of storage works at Boulder 
 Canyon. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. I thought you said a little while ago that there should be some Federal 
 enactment in connection with the rights arising from the use of the water. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Pending the completion of the work of the commission the 
 only need is legal reservations in respect to the construction of this particular dam. 
 I believe that under the law of Colorado, for instance, the erection of storage gives. 
 a right to the use of the water of that storage as against subsequent claimants for water 
 from the stream above the dam so far as it might deplete storage. Necessarily there 
 is some alarm in the minds of the States above that the erection of this particular 
 storage might give the lower basin States the right to call on the upper States to allow 
 the river to flow into the dam without reference to their own needs, and this might 
 apply even were all of the water in storage not used for many years. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Has the commission reached the conclusion that a Federal enactment 
 would settle the question as to whether the lower States should have priority on the 
 Boulder Canyon water? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. No; I do not think the lower States want a priority at all. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. I thought, from what you said that the bill should probably contain a 
 provision that no special rights should arise to the Southern States, as against the 
 others, by reason of the building of the dam, and the question in my mind was whether 
 you had reached a conclusion that. Congress could probably make such a law. 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. My advice was that Congress could, in the bill authorizing the 
 construction of this dam, make such a provision as would relieve the upper States of 
 danger upon this particular point. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Have you had the law examined sufficiently so that you feel sure of 
 your position? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I would want to take further advice about it, especially in 
 view of the late decision of the Supreme Court. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You also spoke of agreements possible between the States. Has it been 
 settled legally that the States can make agreements about that water that would bind 
 anybody? 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. Yes; I am advised that this is a fully established right under 
 the Constitution. It has been very seldom taken advantage of. In other words, it 
 has been established that a treaty can be entered between the States, and if the 
 treaty is ratified by the Congress it becomes statutory law. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. The States of Oregon and Washington entered into an agreement in 
 reference to the Columbia River which was ratified by Congress. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Does that bind any'nodv. in reference to the respective rights? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I assume it is binding. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Suppose there were no such agreement, what would be the effect of a 
 Federal law of that kind? 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. I suppose that if the dam is erected by the Federal Government, 
 the Federal (Jovernnient would be the poss.-s-or of any rights applicable to that dam - 
 you will need legal instruction upon many of these quest ions. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Is that a navigable stream, Mr. Secretary'.' 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. The Colorado has been navigated above the mouth of the Cilu 
 River; it is not navigated at the present time. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Is it navigable at the Boulder Dam?
 
 56 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xn. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. How far from there is it navigable above and below? 
 
 retary HOOVER. Navigation was once carried up to a point some 25 miles below, 
 but systematically say to 100 miles below that canyon. 
 
 Mr. HAYPEX. Years asro steamboats went from the mouth of the Colorado River 
 up to and above Fort Mohave. That was before the transcontinental railroads were / 
 constructed. Since that time there has been but little navigation on the river. ^ 
 The effect of the construction of the Laguna Dam was to prevent navigation, although 
 the river is declared to be navigable by a treaty between the United States and Mexico 
 and is so considered by the \\'ar Department. 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT. Is there any public land at that dam site? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. sir; it would all be built on public land, and from the 
 
 S-actical point of view I assume that every dam that could be built on the Colorado 
 iver at any point would involve the use of public land, so that the Federal Gov- 
 ernment has a very considerable voice in the entire matter. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. What is the length of time that would be required to construct the 
 Boulder Dam? 
 
 Secretary- HOOVER. From 8 to 10 years. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. In view of the emergency in the Imperial Valley is there any other 
 relief that could be more speedily applied than the holding back of the water? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. It is possible to get relief to the people in the Imperial Valley 
 at some intermediate stage of the construction of the dam at Boulder Canyon. I 
 think it ought to be possible to get relief in there in three or perhaps four years. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Has any other plan been contemplated that would obviate the possi- 
 bility of danger to the property interests there? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. There are a number of engineering suggestions that have been 
 made. I doubt whether most of them will hold water, however, when put to the test . 
 One of those suggestions is to blast in the canyon and make a dump in the river that 
 would create a sufficient holdback to give some relief. But I doubt whether any 
 serious engineer would contemplate placing the lives of ultimately from three to four 
 hundred thousand people under the dangers of such construction. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. A couple of years a?o we had under consideration a proposition to build 
 an all-American canal. Could that work go on more speedily than the plan of im- 
 pounding the water? 
 
 Secretarv HOOVER. That work could go on coincidentally with the work on the da m 
 if it were desired. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Does your commission favor that all-American canal? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. We have never discussed that subject because it was one 
 purely local to California. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Have you an opinion on it personally? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I think it ought ultimately to be done. There are many 
 reasons why the United States should be independent of Mexico in the distribution 
 of the Colorado River. At the present moment the Imperial Valley is dependent on 
 the flow through Mexico, and it means constant concessions must be given to Mexico 
 in respect to these waters. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Is the Colorado River Commission giving any consideration to water 
 rights in Mexico in making the proposed apportionment? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I have assumed that whatever rights Mexico may have in the 
 matter will be amply satisfied by the residue of the flow after everybody else is finished. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. That view is entirely satisfactory to me because I do not believe 
 that Mexico has a legal right to any part of the flow of the Colorado River. With 
 respect to the matter of power, I understand that there are a number of applications 
 pending before the Federal Power Commission, one in particular at Diamond Creek, 
 above Boulder Canyon. The applicant. Mr. James B. Girand, of Phoenix, initiated 
 a claim to this power site some years prior to the passage of the Federal water power 
 act and is very insistent that this right be accorded to him. Mr. Girand claims that 
 he has fully complied with the terms of the Federal water power act and is ready to 
 proceed with construction. I understand, however, that some representation was 
 made by the Colorado River Commission to the Federal Power Commission by which 
 the approval of his application has been withheld. Do you know anything about the 
 facts in the matter? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The Colorado River Commission made only the suggestion to 
 the Federal Water Power Commission that none of the rights on the river should be 
 given away that did not fall into mesh with a properly considered national plan for f 
 this development and did not protect the irrigation rights. We might conceivably t 
 have power rights given all along the river that would jeopardize its agricultural 
 development. We muct give agriculture priority. So far as that {articular power
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 57 
 
 >ite is concerned, on investigation I do not believe it would be found that it would 
 affect the agricultural question more than a reservation that is established no right 
 of continuous flow. IT has no storage importance. The governors of some of the 
 States and the Department of the Interior did protest against this permit temporarily. 
 The Colorado River Commission has no authority in the matter and, so far as I know. 
 made no sugire-M ions l.eyond the above. The Federal Government has a serious prob- 
 lem to consider as to the finance of construction of the dam at Boulder Canyon. It 
 would involve a large sum of money, and the recovery of that sum of money will be 
 dependent considerably upon the development of power. It has been contended 
 that to admit a competitor in the sale of that power at once diminishes the return to 
 the Federal Government upon the great burden that it must assume in providing 
 storage. The Diamond Creek Dam would be cheaply constructed and provides no 
 storage of consequence. We must consider that the raver belongs to the people, and 
 that they have a right to develop their river in such fashion as to give them a maxi- 
 mum return in power, storage, and control of floods. I have the feeling that the 
 Boulder Canyon Dam will require a number of years for completion. It will require 
 10 years before it can be brought in as a large power unit, and during that period 
 there will be a large development of a market for power, and it is possible, on a careful 
 study of that situation, that the Diamond Creek power development would not inter- 
 fere with the ultimate market of the Boulder Canyon. But both the Department of 
 the Interior and some of the individual members of the Colorado River Commission 
 considered it was wise to hold that application up until the subject was fully inquired 
 into. 
 
 Mr. SWING. May 1 add. in fairness to the commission, that I personally know that 
 a great number of protests were tiled with the Federal Power Commission, many of 
 them from California, and I know some in Colorado. 
 
 retary HOOVEK. There was some feeling that Congress might be less inclined to 
 a'ct'in saving this emergency situation in the Imperial Valley if the power develop- 
 ment was not held up until Congress had all the factors before it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I understand then that at the present time there are no prior rights 
 granted, although there are some applications on file, that would in any way affect 
 the Government construction of the Boulder Canyon dam to its highest capacity. 
 
 retary HOOVER. Xo: I do not think there are any power rights that amount to 
 anything. There are some rights in the upper river but they are of no importance 
 in consideration of the Boulder dam. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. It seems to be the policy to grant no rights until the right of the 
 Government is fully established as to the capacity of the dam at Boulder Canyon 
 and the amount of water that would come there to create a supply for power purposes 
 as well as irrigation. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I have felt that Congress ought to have the right to consider 
 this situation before any portion of it was disposed of. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then as I understand it, as far as determination by the Reclamation 
 Service and the Colorado Jliver Commission has gone, it is that there is sufficient 
 water, flood and otherwise, to justify btiilding the Boulder Canyon dam? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Certainly. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then, in the second place, the Government acting as an individual 
 would act in constructing the dam. would make its filing, just as anybody outside of the 
 Government would do. for this water right, and then when the dam was constructed 
 and ready for use its right would date back to the time of its tiling so it would know 
 what it originally started in for and believed it had. a sufficient water right, it could 
 maintain at the completion of the dam in order that there would be no interfering 
 with any subsequent rights acquired by virtue of prior construction necessary after 
 filing notice by the Government. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. We have put it in a different way. I do not believe the Gov- 
 ernment requires any water right. It does not need to go through any process of 
 establishing a water risrht. The actual situation will solve that for itself. The flow 
 of water will. I believe, keep the dam full even with full development above. But 
 I believe that it is well to relieve the anxiety of the upper States by declaring that the 
 Government would exercise no claims in respect to it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In that connection would we not be met with the contention that if 
 other dams were constructed, even alter the Government had started, thai they had 
 complied with the law and that they might have a prior right over the Government, 
 and therefore it. would lie better for the < iovernment to lay its foundation permanently 
 so there could be no question of the loss of its rights u!'t'"- it had .-\ jn-tiiled an oMnniimin 
 amount for the construction of the dam? 
 
 Secretary iloovKR. We thought that c-nild he better safeguarded \ty providing that 
 any water rights given on the river for power purposes should not constitute any claim
 
 58 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER J'.ASIN. 
 
 against agricultural users. In the discussion of the Diamond Creek water right I 
 think it was agreed by all sides that if and when granted it should contain a provi- 
 that the dam could not establish any water ri'_rht. not even a right to th-> continued 
 ilnw of the river. In other words, that the person who erected the dam took all the 
 ri-ks. I do not think those applicants could have any objection to it because they 
 know the water will flow with sufficient certainty for a century or so. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Could any private individual acquire any better rights if the Govern- J| 
 ment declared it would take them as a result of this dam? 
 
 .etary HOOVER. I would want to make further inquiry as to the effect of the 
 recent decision of the Supreme Court upon the question. That is whether an indi- 
 vidual below the dam by applying the water to beneficial use which arose through 
 storage in the dam. would thereby create a right as against later application of the ! 
 of water above the dam. That question would have to be inquired into in the Ik lit 
 of the new decision. Ar the time this bill was discussed it was the view of the solici- 
 tors for the department that the Congress could, by a provision in this act, remedy the 
 fears of the upper States. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. They could fix private individuals' rights? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. This discussion, however, was before the recent decision. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. As I understand you now. the purpose of the commission is that this bill 
 shall contain provisions by which the Government is not obliged to accept any water 
 rights at all? 
 
 retary HOOVER. Xo; that it contain a provision that will, to the satisfactior 
 the upper States, protect them as' against any prior water rights created by the con- 
 struction of the dam its<-lf. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. By the Government? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. But not against the individual: as to that you have not reached a final 
 decision? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. That no prior right is to be created by the construction of this dam? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes: if it can be made to apply to that. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask whether it is the idea that the same character of legislation 
 shall appear in the bill with regard to power rights, too? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Certain power will be developed. Is there any provision put into this- 
 bill as to that? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo; I do not think there is any feeling that there needs to be 
 any provision as to the distribution of power. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. The Government has no power to provide that individuals would have 
 no right under the law to make any claim on it. Every man would have the right to- 
 create this power. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. With reference to the provisions of the first section of the Swing bil! r 
 Mr. W. S. Xorviel. a member of the Colorado River commission, who is also the Ariz- 
 ona State water commissioner, has written me a letter in which he says: 
 
 "In the.first section, beginning with line 8 to the end of the section, the languap 
 objected to for the reason that it takes out of the control of the State of Arizona 01. 
 her largest undeveloped resources, and one to which we have long looked to be of very 
 great benefit to our State when developed. It would appear from the language that all 
 persons, municipal corporations, private corporations or States would be prevented 
 from constructing or owning any dams or diversion works in the Colorado River below 
 the mouth of the Green River. I personally object to this presumed reservation on the 
 part of the United States of the exclusive right to construct, etc.. because, as I deem it. 
 the United States has no authority to make any such reservation, nor can such author- 
 ity be granted by Conirr- 
 
 I am sure that the committee would be pleased to have the benefit of your views. 
 as to the necessity for such legislation as is proposed in section 1 of this bill. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. It seems to me it was an unnecessary provision from many 
 points of view. It does raise a serious question in the minds of the States, but as a 
 matter of fact there can be no building of dams without permission of the Govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Anyone now has authority under the water power act to make 
 application for a power site on public land and may obtain a permit to develop it. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. If section 1 was enacted as it stands, it would practically amount ^^. 
 to a repeal of the water power act so far as the Colorado River below it junction f . 
 with Green River is concerned.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BAS1X. 59 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. An applicant has the right to apply under the water power act, but 
 he has no vested right. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN". I suppose that the Federal Water Power Commission naturally con- 
 sults the other Government departments before acting, but this section proposes to 
 absolutely prevent the Water Power Commission from granting a permit, because 
 all rights on the lower river are to be reserved to the United States. 
 
 Se -ret.iry HOOVER. I have never S'vn any particular value in that provision. It 
 iMH'-s a very contentious question. The States are maintaining thein rights to a voice 
 in the assignment of power privileges so that even when a power right is granted by the 
 I-',- i.'i'al I'o.'.vr < o'umission rhe possessors of that right must go back to the States and 
 lieir permits. I doubt whether any State will want to sacrifice its own rights in 
 matters, and I have never seen any real reason for introducing it here. The 
 primary question here should be simply the construction of storage works that will 
 give relief to the emergency situation in the Imperial Valley and increase the possi- 
 bilities of irriga ion. 
 
 Mr. SivNorr. How long will it take to construct the necessary works to remove that 
 e:n Tgent situa f io:i? 
 
 retary HOOVKR. I think it is the feeling of the reclamation engineers that at 
 Borne perio 1. say ihree or four years after the commencement of the construction, they 
 will be in a position to remove the major danger. 
 
 Mr. SWIN ; . llH' "Tin , r to the questions previously asked, assuming, as I do, that 
 you think the V>esi possible development of the Colorado River calls for a unified 
 project for development upon a harmonious, comprehensive plan, is there any other 
 agency, other than the Government, that. can work that out as a unified project? 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. Xu: the Government must preserve the unity in the develop- 
 ment. It has the powers through control of the public lands and the Federal Power 
 Commission and various other agencies. 
 
 Mr-. RAKER. That being the fact, if the Government spends $40,000,000 to construct 
 the Boulder dam the testimony is that that would supply the entire territory. Would 
 it be advisable for the Government to yield this right and permit others to construct 
 dams for hydroelectric power purposes and then have the two competing for cus- 
 tomers? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. If it was a question of preventing the return of the Govern- 
 ment investment, I would say no. But it is my impression that the demand for 
 power in that territory will ultimately far exceed that which will be supplied by 
 this particular development. I do not know that it is any objective of the Federal 
 (iovernment to go into power development per se. The Government is concerned 
 to secure a control works with irrigation storage erected at the least outlay. The 
 Diamond Creek development is entirely a power development and would " have no 
 influence on agriculture or flood control. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. My point was and I got my impression from your answers that the 
 two could be constructed and still there would be a demand for the power generated 
 by both of them. 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. Yes: and I think for even greater amounts, eventually. The 
 whole problem is one of time. At this moment there is probably an immediate need 
 of, say, 200,000 horsepower; 10 years hence there is a possibility of a need of a million 
 horsepower. 
 
 Mr. Hrnsi'ETH. You spoke of the construction of the all -American canal for the 
 immediate relief of the people in the Imperial Valley. How long would it take to 
 const met that canal? 
 
 Secretary HOOVKR. The ail-American canal will not control the flood waters. I 
 have not looked into it in any detail, and I could not give you any reliable statement 
 as to the time required. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Do I correctly understand your statement, Mr. Secretary, in regard to 
 the water supply, that even if the Flaming Gorge dam, the Dewey Gorge dam, and 
 the Glen Canyon dam were put in by private individuals or otherwise, and the Boulder 
 Canyon was <tarted and finally completed, there would be no diminution of water to 
 interfere with the full complement for the supply of that dam? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo: it is our conviction that there is enough water to lill ulti- 
 mately every one of those dam-. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So we will not have to worry about the Boulder Canyon dam being fully 
 supplied, irrespective of the contemplated dams that have been discussed? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo: I do not think so. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. The whole scheme contemplates that the (iovernment shall be reiin- 
 Nbursed for the entire expenditure? 
 i Secretary HOOVER. Ultimately. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. What proportion of the expense will probably be charged to agriculture?
 
 60 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVKR 1JASIX. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. That is a very difiicult question to answer, because it would 
 depend on the power market which is not yet created. It is to sorne extent a bet on 
 the future development of the territory and a safe bet. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. In apportioning the cost per acre to the land it would necessarily be 
 limited to an- amount that would make the investment attractive to the settler, so it 
 seems to me it is important to determine in advance whether the land could be profit- 
 ably reclaimed. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. There is, perhaps, some hazard as to some portion of this capital 
 outlay, but I would not be able to say how much. We may look at it from a broader 
 point of view than the return of the whole capital outlay. I believe the Government 
 would be entirely justified in spending a large sum on flood control alone, in preserva- 
 tion of a large community and wealth, without considering that the whole cost be 
 levied upon the land. 
 
 Mr. BAXKHEAD. How much is it estimated that this dam at Boulder Canyon will 
 cost? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. The estimates vary from forty to fifty million dollars. Perhaps 
 in the neighborhood of $40,000.000. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. Has any estimate been made on the other improvements that are 
 contemplated above to carry out the whole project? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. My offhand impression is that 200 years hence, when we have 
 developed all the land that can be developed by the river, we will have spent $400,- 
 000.000. 
 
 Mr. BAXKHEAD. No immediate development other than the Boulder Canyon dam 
 is in contemplation? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. There are some reclamation projects on the upper river that 
 would involve dams at Dewey and Flaming Gorge, but they are much less expensive. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. What other dam or dams are in prospect before the proposition is finally 
 completed? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. There probably will be dams at Boulder Canyon. Diamond 
 Creek. Glen Canyon, Flaming Gorge, Dewey. and there are several other subsidiary 
 dams. So far as storage is concerned both of the great dams at Glen Canyon and at 
 Boulder Canyon would not be required for a century. They might both be required 
 for power purposes. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. You have been speaking about the Boulder Canyon dam? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. What do you think of the feasibility of a dam there? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. These canyons on the Colorado are the moat ideal spots in the 
 world for dams of large storage and power possibilities. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Irrespective of the fact that this dam might be filled up with silt, the 
 expenditure would justify its being built now, would it not? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. The silt question is purely academic. It has been 
 brought forward in criticism. Director Davis estimates that it will require over 200 
 years to fill the dam. It would still be good for power purposes even then. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I inquire what is the history as to filling up with silt? Are they 
 filled up with silt? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I have not looked into it. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. I am rather surprised with the statement* of the experts on this silt 
 business. I have not heard anything of that kind happening, and I have lived 
 alongside one of these dams for a long time. This is the first time I have heard of 
 that. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. This will be the first dam built on the river, and the erection of 
 another is hardly contemplated; so is it not true that this dam will be completed 
 before the other project would be started? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes; it would be long before that. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. In that event, it would not need the entire flow of the river to obtain 
 a level; the surplus from the other watershed would probably be sufficient to maintain 
 the level. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. One has to bear in mind that the average amount of water 
 that can be put to maximum use below the Boulder Canyon dam will probably be 
 much less than the average flow of the river over a number of years, no matter how 
 many dams there are built above. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. That is what was in my mind. 
 
 Mr. SixxoTT. Are there any other features of the bill that you desire to present to 
 the committee? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. No. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. Would the building of a number of dams lessen the flow of the silt? 
 
 r
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 61 
 
 Secretary HOOVEK. Yes; these are dams that will create a large body of still water. 
 Glen and Boulder Canyons would each create a lake, and that will undoubtedly 
 result in a deposit of silt. This is a river that carries a good deal of mud. That mud 
 is now deposited in the lower regions of the river. At the present time it is raising the 
 bed of the lower end of the river at the rate of somewhat under a foot per annum. So 
 that the dikes which now protect the Imperial Valley must be lifted every year. If 
 it is possible to put the silt farther up the river it is going to relieve the problem down 
 below very materially. That is one of the advantages in having the dams built. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. Would the Boulder Canyon dam back the water up the river to the 
 Grand Canyon? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Xo; it is a long way from that. There is no destruction that will 
 be caused by any of the contemplated work. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Do you think the Director of the National Park Service would admit 
 that ? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I think he would be good enough to admit that it would im- 
 prove the scenery in some of that section. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. You said that it was the intention that the Government should be 
 ultimately reimbursed. That would have to come either from the power generated 
 or from the distribution of water rights for agricultural purposes? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes. 
 
 Mr. BAXKHEAD. Is it contemplated that any interest will be charged or simply the 
 original investment? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Under the reclamation act there is a practical abandonment 
 of interest during a certain stage, as you know. I imagine this development should 
 have the same consideration. At least that contribution (if it became necessary) 
 could be made to secure flood control. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Davis told us last week that none of the expense for the construction 
 of the Boulder Canyon dam and its accessories would be expected to be charged 
 against the irrigationist, and that the Boulder Canyon dam would be paid for by the 
 sale of power alone, and that it ought not to be charged against the irrigationist. What 
 is your view on that? He thought it would justify construction for power purposes. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I think you are justified in the conclusion that if the Federal 
 Government now advances money in some form by which this project can be carried 
 forward, it will ultimately recover the money it puts into it. But to go fuither than 
 to express sueh an opinion is very difficult, because qne gets into calculations of the 
 power market and power rates, and the period at which the power could be de- 
 livered, etc. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But it is your view that, irrespective of the returns that may come 
 from water or from power or from irrigation there is a sufficient demand to fully justify 
 the Government in constructing it, with the assurance that it will be reimbursed", 
 with a reasonable rate of interest. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I rather feel that the Government ought to make up its mind 
 on one thing, and while I believe it could be reimbursed with interest, yet there is 
 here a Federal function of establishing flood control in the protection of citizens, 
 in which the Federal Government has, as an established policy, always contributed 
 something from the people at large, and that we ought to be prepared to believe that 
 some sacrifice may be made by the Ferderal Government in that respect. I do not 
 think you need to contemplate it now, but I would not want to say that some item 
 of this sort does not deserve consideration. If the power market comes up to expecta- 
 tions the Government might over a long term of yeais make a profit from the whole 
 transaction on power alone. 
 
 Mr. HEKUICK. When the Government builds a battleship that costs $40,000,000, at 
 the end of 12 or 15 years that battleship is obsolete and its value to the Government 
 has gone down to almost nothing, whereas if you build this dam with the expenditure 
 of this money at the end of fifteen yeais its value is intact. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. And not only that, this dam will be for all time a source of 
 direct income, and beyond that it will have created new homes for many citizens and 
 will have protected many thousands of them that are now in danger. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. M.r. Secretary, the bill before the committee has in it some very im- 
 portant provisions in regard to the cost, and other features which are important, and 
 I would like to have your views, and I think the committee would, too, on some of 
 those features of the bill, if you care to give them. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. I have not gone into the details of the bill far enough, and I 
 did not want to do that until I had a chance to discuss it with the coiuiiiisi--i<.n and 
 ascertain whether they have any views: in other words. I would rather that the States 
 express their own views on that, and they no doubt will.
 
 62 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Will you come back later and give us the benefit of your views, that 
 is. after you have fully matured them? 
 
 retary HOOVER. If you like, but T prefer that you get those views from each 
 individual State: in other words. I hesitate to express any views because I am sitting 
 as chairman of their commission. You can get an expression from them because they 
 will no doubt be before you soon. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. In your consideration of this proposition has there been 
 brought to your attention from any authoritati :t definite and roncret.- 
 
 proposition to buy this power; that is. from the city of Los Angeles or from any other 
 local power market? 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. Yes: there are three or four groups interested in this power 
 question. It is one of the most contentious parts of the whole business, hut it did not 
 seem to me that it is vitallv necessary to make up our minds now as to what we should 
 do three, five, or ten years hence. The power will be wanted even more then than now. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. When this matter is presented to Congress it is very important 
 that we have some definite assurances as to how the Government is be reimbursed. 
 because that is the problem that confronts us in connection with every irrigation 
 project we suirg -st. namely, when will the Government get its money back? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In addition to that, the public will want some definite assurance 
 through legislation that no one particular individual, if authority is given to dispose 
 of it. will get hold of this power for 40 or 50 years and monopolize it. That phase of it 
 must be carefully considered. 
 
 Secretary HOOVER. But you have a double protection there because all the power 
 in the United States is now distributed subject to public utility control as to rates and 
 everything else. 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT. If there are no more questions to be asked of Mr. Hoover, we thank him 
 very much. Mr. Secretary, your statement has been very illuminating.
 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
 LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON 
 IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS 
 
 HOUSE OF KEPKESENTATIVES 
 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
 SECOND SESSION 
 
 ON 
 
 H. R. 11449 
 
 By Mr. SWING 
 
 A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT 
 OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 PART 2 
 
 JUNE 21, 1922 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 GOVKIINMKNT 1'HINTING OFFICB 
 IMG 1922
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. 
 
 MOSES P. KINKAID, Nebraska, Chairman. 
 
 NICHOLAS J. SINNOTT, Oregon. CARL HAYDEN, Arizona. 
 
 EDWARD C. LITTLE, Kansas. C. B. HUDSPETH, Texas. 
 
 ADDISON T. SMITH, Idaho. JOHN E. RAKER, California. 
 
 JOHN W. SUMMERS, Washington. HOMER L. LYON, North Carolina. 
 
 HENRY E. BARBOUR, California. WILLIAM B. BANKUEAD, Alabama. 
 
 E. O. LEATHERWOOD, Utah. 
 WILLIAM WILLIAMSON, South Dakota. 
 SAMUEL S. ARENTZ, Nevada. 
 MANUEL HERRICK, Oklahoma. 
 
 A. R. HUMPHREY, Clerk. 
 II
 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER 
 
 BASIN. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS, 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 Wednesday, June 21, 1922 Continued. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I would like to present Professor Durand, of Stanford University. 
 Professor Durand is a graduate of the Annapolis Academy and has served in the United 
 States Xavy. He has been engaged in research work for the Government on water 
 propellers and more recently on air propellers. He was professor of marine engineering 
 at Cornell University and at present is professor of mechanical engineering at Stanford 
 University. During the war he was chairman of the Advisory Committee for Aeronau- 
 tics and was later scientific attache at Paris. He was the connecting link between 
 the United States Government and the Allies on war research. He is a member of 
 the -board of consulting engineers of San Francisco on the Hetch Hetchy project and 
 has been a member of the Los Angeles Hydro Electric Consulting Board since 1909. 
 
 STATEMENT OF PROF. W. F. DURAND. 
 
 Professor DURAND. I should, perhaps, explain that the reason I am appearing before 
 this committee (my primary connection being as a professor in Stanford University) 
 is due to the fact that during the entire period of the development of the municipal 
 power system of Los Angeles I have been in association with those undertakings in 
 a consulting capacity and have, therefore, had an opportunity of becoming familiar 
 with the power problems of Los Angeles as a city and, in a considerable degree, with 
 those affecting the southern part of California, and, of course, in some lesser degree 
 the entire section of the Southwest. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Were you employed by the city? 
 
 Professor DURAND. By the city, yes. Perhaps I should also say that my contact with 
 these problems has been chiefly technical and the subjects which I might naturally 
 discuss before this committee have already been generally covered by the Director of the 
 Reclamation Service. Any detailed discussion of these phases of the subject would 
 therefore lead to a repetition, in considerable degree, of a part of the testimony already 
 presented before the committee. This I believe to be unnecessary and I shall, there- 
 fore, endeavor to restrict my comments to certain features which were not so fully 
 dealt with by the Director of the Reclamation Service and to certain other points 
 which may be of interest to the committee. 
 
 Evidence has been shown, in the questions which members of the committee have 
 asked, regarding the very keen interest which they take in the problem of financial 
 reinbursement, the problem of the practicability of the scheme as a financial and 
 economic undertaking, and I wish to speak to that point briefly that is, regarding 
 the question of the prospective market for pow r er as we see it in the southern part of the 
 State of California and generally throughout the Southwest. It is known, I take it, to 
 most members of the committee, that the city of Los Angeles has already developed 
 power along the line of the aqueduct to the extent, in round numbers, of about 100,000 
 horsepower; the remaining capacity of the aqueduct and of the streams immediately 
 tributary thereto represents something like 150,000 horsepower more, so that the ulti- 
 mate development of the power immediately along the line of the aqueduct thinking 
 merely now of Los Angeles as the single customer will be represented by something 
 like 2oO,000 horsepower. The present demand for power in the city of I.os Angeles 
 far outruns its present development and it is itself at the present time a large purchaser 
 of power i rom the private power companies. The business agent of the city of I os 
 Angeles in recent years has been compelled to decline discussion with large prospective 
 power users regarding power for industrial purposes and representing an aggregate of 
 something like 100,000 horsepower. That is to say. there exists at prosMit a ^oid 
 which might be immediately filled or filled at a very early date represented by some 
 such figure. 
 
 63
 
 64 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER C'OLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. One hundred thousand horsepower? 
 
 Professor DURAXU. Yc.v 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is being done to develop this other 150.000 horsepower? 
 
 Professor DURAND. They are proceeding as rapidly as circumstances will permit. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And expect in due course to develop it to the entire limit? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Yes. sir; I am coming to that point immediately. The annual 
 increase in power demand in the city of Los Angeles in recent years has run at about 
 20 per cent, so that looking forward into the future it is a 20 per cent compound interest 
 program. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Annually? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Annually, yes. sir; for the increase of power. And what is 
 true of Los Angeles is likewise substantially true for the other communities in the 
 southern part of the State, as well as for the whole Southwest in a general way. At this 
 rate of increase for the city of Los Angeles the entire capacity of its aqueduct power 
 system will be required some time in 1925. That is to say. if Los Angeles is able to 
 proceed promptly with the further development of these resources, it will in 1925 have 
 reached the limit of their capacity and will immediately thereafter be in the market 
 actively for other blocks of power. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. About what is the estimated amount now required by the cities in 
 southern California outside of Los Angeles? 
 
 Professor DUKAND. The demand for power in southern California outside of Los 
 Angeles is such as to require an active working installation of something over 400,000 
 horsepower capacity, with, or course, a reasonable excess installed capacity to insure 
 continuity of service. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. They are now short too, are they not? 
 
 Professor DURAND. There is a definite power shortage throughout the entire southern 
 part of the State. Ihis is especially the case in Los Angeles, and what is true of Los 
 Angeles is, I am confident from my own contact with the situation in the southern 
 part of the State, likewise true of other municipalities and of the entire section, and 
 it is likewise true with regard to contiguous States and, in a general way, the entire 
 section which would be related to the Colorado River as a source of power. In fact, 
 what I believe to be a conservative estimate covering the probable increase in power 
 demands during the future period of yeaie seerrs to indicate that if there were no 
 further supply in the meantime, the shortage within a pericd of seven or eight years, 
 certainly by the time the Boulder Canyon Dam was completed and ready for service, 
 would be sufficient to immediately absorb the entire amount, and by the entire amount 
 I mean 600,000 continuous horsepower. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is your view as to the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam by 
 the Government rather than by private individuals? 
 
 Professor DURAND. I think the Government is the only agency which should un- 
 dertake the construction of the dam. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Is it not true that the city of Los Angeles has not only developed 
 power along the aqueduct but is also seeking to obtain permission to develop power 
 sites in the Sierra Xevadas north of Tehachapi Pass, Calif. , with the purpose of bringing 
 the power down to the city of Los Angeles? 
 
 Professor DURAND. I do not know to what extent the city is actively interested 
 in the actual development of those sites but I know it has made some surveys and has 
 estimated certain possibilities. Those possibilities, however, were not included 
 in the figures which I gave a moment ago. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I also understood that there was objection on the part of those north 
 of the Tehachapi Pass to Los Angeles invading their territory and developing the 
 power which they would ultimately need, feeling that Los Angeles should be con- 
 fined, as to its source of power, to southern California, and that the power resources 
 of northern California be ultimately developed and used for the development of 
 that section of the State. 
 
 Professor DURAND. That is quite true. 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. I can testify to that. too. Mr. Hayden. 
 
 Professor DIRAND. But I should also state, as far as I can speak for the city of Los 
 Angeles, that she would much prefer to insure in some way an adequate supply of 
 power from the Colorado River rather than from these other sources referred to. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Has Los Angeles an application now pending for power privilege* on 
 the Colorado River, I mean, before the power commission? 
 
 Professor DURAND. I think there were certain applications filed some time ago 
 simply for the purpose of insuring what might be called a hearing for Los Angeles 
 when the question of the allocation of power should arise or in case the Federal Gov- 
 ernment should not proceed with the undertaking of securing for the city an oppor- 
 tunity of developing such power for herself.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 65 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then, so far as you know, California. Nevada, Arizona, and that country 
 are sort of a unit in favor of the Government commencing on this Boulder Canyon 
 p!>sver project? 
 
 Professor DURA.ND. Yes; I so understand, and I know furthermore that the com- 
 munities Lrcnerally in that section of the country are in immediate need of additional 
 power and are desirous of its prompt development from the Colorado Ri\ er. To come 
 back to the point I was speaking of 
 
 Mr. liARBoru i interposing). Before you leave that, could you give us any state- 
 ment as to the amount of horsepower, or electric energy in horsepower, that is now 
 used by the city of Los Angeles? 
 
 Professor DURAND. The present developments in its own plants, as I said a moment 
 ago, represent 100,000 horsepower. 
 
 Mr. l.ARnoru. And that is all along the aqueduct? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Yes, sir. It is, furthermore, a purchaser of power to a large 
 degree and I am sorry I am unable to give those figures. I should, perhaps, state foi 
 the benefit of the committee that I am appearing here in some small way representing 
 Mr. Seattergood, the electrical engineer of the city, who is, unfortunately, ill in the 
 hospital and is unable for that reason to appear before the committee. I have myself 
 just returned from Europe and was caught by a telegram when I landed in New York 
 and asked to come over here to assist in presenting this situation before the committee. 
 I have been quite familiar with certain phases of these problems but the chief elec- 
 trical engineer of the city would have all of these figures at his fingers' ends while 
 unfortunately I have not. Subsequent examination develops the figure of about 
 160,000 horsepower capacity as representing the present total requirements of the 
 city of Los Angeles, with proper reserve in addition to insure reliability of service. 
 
 I was about to say a moment ago, with regard to the aggregate amount of power 
 which will be developed on the Colorado River at Boulder Canyon, 600,000 horsepower, 
 that unquestionably the interests in the territory to be served from that site will not 
 remain without some further power development in the meantime, but it is very 
 sure, as far as we can in any way humanly forecast the situation, that the future power 
 developments within the next six or eight years are going to run far short of the require- 
 ments in that period, so that at the time the Boulder Canyon project shall be com- 
 pleted and ready for service there will be a very large void for power ready to be filled 
 up promptly from that source, and I am satisfied in my own mind that within a very 
 short period of time after the completion of that project the entire output of the plant 
 will be required and can be marketed at figures which, as I shall show in a moment, 
 will represent an economic security for the money invested. 
 
 Furthermore, I believe that the communities interested in this power will be ready, 
 on the completion of the project, to become immediately responsible not only for such 
 an amount of power from the Boulder Canyon plant as shall represent their immediate 
 deficits, but also for such further amounts as will anticipate to some extent their 
 future, and that in this manner the section of the country interested in this power 
 will be ready to assume responsibility for the entire output of the plant and thus 
 relieve the Government of all carrying charges. I believe that I am justified in say- 
 ing that the city of Los Angeles is ready to assume such responsibility to an extent 
 far beyond its presumable deficit of power at the time the Boulder Canyon project is 
 ready for service, and I am confident that other communities will in like manner 
 wish to safeguard against their future growth. I believe that on a conservative esti- 
 mate, from one-halt to two-thirds of the total output will be immediately required 
 by the time the project is ready for service and that responsibility for the balance 
 will he eagerly accepted by communities interested, thus covering the entire carry- 
 ing charges as already stated . 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Through what means and from what source are you going to secure the 
 power you say you need between now and the time the Boulder Canyon dam is 
 completed? 
 
 Professor DURAND. The private power companies in the southern part of the State 
 have still other projects in contemplation and in progress of development. These 
 projects, by and large, will cost more per unit than will the power at t he IJoulder Can- 
 yon Dam, but the customers will not wait; there will be a market for power which 
 will justify the development of some considerable amounts in the meantime but I 
 can not undertake to say how much. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Is it your view that the private individuals and concerns that are now 
 developing power arid will have developed it by eight years from now, if the Boulder 
 ( 'anyon Dam is completed in eight years, will, at the time the Boulder Canyon Dam 
 is working, lose their customers? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Xo. I mean, they will not be able to develop power enough 
 to supply the market.
 
 66 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In the meantime? 
 
 Professor DURAXD. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. When the Boulder Canyon Dam is completed and 600.000 horsepower 
 is developed will these private indiduals and concerns be put out of business? 
 
 Professor DVRAXD. Xo: I take it they will not be put out of business, but there 
 may be required some readjustment of rates. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Of course, that would be one of the things to be adjusted, but Mr. 
 Hoover says that all of those things are now adjusted by commissions and, therefore, 
 we do not have to worry about them, but if in the next 8 or 10 years there was a large 
 development outside of Los Angeles by these private concerns and private individuals 
 to supply the demand that is increasing all the time, I was wondering whether or not 
 by the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam they would thereby be put in the 
 position that their property would be practically worthless? 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. Would not the developments in the other parts of the State result 
 in the consumption of all that power? Even though Los Angeles did not use it other 
 sections would be developing and thus result in a demand for more power in those 
 s?ctions. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I was trying to get the professor's view on that. 
 
 Professor Di HAND. My opinion as to that point is this: That there will possibly 
 be required some careful consideration of rates on the part of the rate-making power 
 at that period of time, but I do not foresee the putting out of business of any of these 
 present or even immediately prospective power plants. I believe, furthermore, it 
 is a fact that certain of these power companies are looking forward with considerable 
 care to the projects which they propos? undertaking in the immediate future, having 
 an eye on the possibilities of the developments at Boulder Canyon Dam: they are, 
 in other words, discounting to some extent the possible developments at Boulder 
 Canyon Dam. 
 
 To develop this thought in a little further detail, I should consider that by the time 
 the Boulder Canyon project is ready for power service, the actual deficit or void await- 
 ing to be filled will amount to one-third of the total output or more, and this without 
 counting on more than the normal growth in present modes of power use. Additional 
 or new industrial uses of hydropower, stimulated by favorable rates, will undoubtedly 
 be planned for operation concident with the completion of the project. Among such 
 uses mention may be made of irrigation pumping, mining and chemical industries and 
 the electrification of railroads in the section within economic reach of this source of 
 power. It is a matter of common knowledge that the Sante Fe Railroad is already 
 manifesting an active interest in the possibilities of power from this source. Those new 
 or extended uses, over and above what may lie termed normal growth, will easily carry 
 the total demand at the completion of the project to the amount of one-half or two- 
 thirds the total output, as stated at an earlier point. 
 
 This would leave say one-third of the output only, as reserve against future growth, 
 an amount representing only a moderate provision against the future and certainly in 
 nowi-e justifying the scrapping of any of the earlier existing plants. 
 
 Furthermore there are certain areas served by these existing companies which would 
 not so readily come within the scope of service from Boulder Canyon and normal growth 
 within such areas would aid in furnishing an outlet for their power product. 
 
 Again, it is common practice with power companies, as the time approaches for 
 bringing in a new station or a new block of power, to allow the margin of reserve power 
 (power capacity over and above that normally required and serving as an insurance 
 against interruptions in service) to gradually decrease, thus diminishing the margin 
 intended to secure reliability and continuity of service. This policy will undoubtedly 
 be followed in the case of the Boulder Canyon project and all power companies will 
 thus anticipate service from this source by a continuous decrease in the desirable 
 margin of reserve power and in a correspondingly increased use of their steam plants. 
 This is what was referred to a moment ago as an anticipation of or a discounting of the 
 future with reference to the influence of Boulder Canyon on the general power situa- 
 tion. It thus results that a considerable block of the Boulder Canyon power, when 
 brought in. may be considered as no more Jhan restoring the proper margin of reserve 
 power desirable in order to insure continuity .and reliability of service. 
 
 Taking these various considerations into account, it seems clear that there need 
 be no apprehension that the advent of Boulder Canyon power will result in putting 
 out of business the earlier and smaller plants. There will be use for all the hydro- 
 power which we shall be able to develop. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Do you know whether or not the city of Los Angelee is in a 
 position or is inclined to make a proposition to the Government to take over and use a 
 certain amount of this power in the event the Boulder Canyon Dam is constructed, 
 so that we might have some idea as to when the Government will be reimbursed for 
 its expenditure?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 67 
 
 Professor DURAND. I can say yes to that question. I believe the city of Lcs 
 Angeles is ready to make an immediate proposition. Just what the tours of that 
 proposition might be, of course, I am not prepared to state, but I do know that she 
 is so anxious to insure for herself an adequate supply of power in the future as to 
 be quite ready to enter into an immediate understanding with regard to the point 
 you have mentioned. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. It has been represented in the newspapers that at least cne- 
 half of the expense of constructing this dam would be taken care of by power sold 
 to the city of Los Angeles, and that is a question which will have to be worked out 
 before the matter comes up on the floor of the House. 
 
 Professor DUHAXD. Whether it will be one-half or some other fraction, of couree, 
 I could not tell offhand at the present time, but I am sure that the city of I cs A ngelcs 
 is very desirous of entering into some understanding in regard to these matters. 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. Mr. Creswell, I understand, intends to discuss that feature of the 
 matter. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Possibly I did not make myself plain. Taking your statement as to the 
 demand for power during the next 10 years, and assuming that the Boulder Canyon 
 Dam will not be completed and ready for 10 years, and these private concerns and 
 private individuals proceed to develop their present projects, at the end of 10 years 
 will there be a demand for the power created by the Boulder Canyon Dam, in addi- 
 tion to the developments of the private concerns and private individuals I have 
 spoken of, that will justify the private concerns and private individuals in con- 
 tinuing in buisness and getting a fair return from the power they sell to the public 
 &s .well as from the energy to be taken from the Boulder Canyon Dam? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Yes. sir; I think there will be; I think the demand for power 
 will l)o :--o in-oat that within a period of seven or eight vears it will absorb the output of 
 the Boulder Canyon project and at the same time let these other projects continue 
 on a reasonable business basis. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So that the contemplated construction and completion of the Boulder 
 < 'an von Dam v.ith an ultimate capacity of (100,000 horsepov er. will not. in your view, 
 interfere with the general development now contemplated by the private concerns 
 and private individuals for the purpose of building up the countrv generally? 
 
 Professor DURAXD. Xo. sir; it will not. I wiD now pass to the next point which 
 I had in mind. 
 
 A 'r. SINXOTT. Would you prefer to go on and not be interrupted until you complete 
 what vou have to say? 
 
 Professor DUKAXD. Xot at all; I am perfectlv willing to be interrupted at any point. 
 T v ill now s-.'v a T'ord ith regard to the possible figures at which this pov- or might be 
 sold. Of course-, it "ill be understood that any such estimates are entirelv tentative 
 in character, especially go far in advance of the realization of any part of the project; 
 sti'l ( an be made which will apparently indicate the order of figure at. which 
 
 such power might be sold. 
 
 I have taken the estimates of the Director of the Reclamation Service as to the cost 
 of the dam, and I have made other estimates v.ith regard to the cost of the power plant 
 and machinery: I am applying fixed charges of 9.V per cent which, I take it, will be 
 sufficient to cover an interest charge of 5 per cent: depreciation on such part of the 
 entire plant as will be subject to depreciation and provision for the retirement of the 
 bonds at 2J per cent: this, together with a reasonable operating charge, would result 
 in a total annual charge of -about $8, 000,000. The total annual output of the plant, 
 operated as the equivalent of 600,000 horsepower continuous throughout the year. 
 would be 3. <>20. 000. 000 kilowatt hours, and this works out nlni".-< exactly to one-fifth 
 of a cent per kilowatt hour that is to say, this power could apparently be generated 
 and delivered at the plant with a fixed charge, which would insure the in1<'iv<! 
 depreciation where required and retirement of bonds at a charge of about one-fifth 
 of a cent per unit or kilowatt hour. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. It is now 12 o'clock. What is the wish of the commit)' 
 
 Mr. S \vixc. Professor Durand must leave to-night. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. Ilmv much more time do you wish? 
 
 Professor DURAND. I can finish very promptly and it would be a great privilege to 
 me if I might he permitted to do so. 
 
 Now. with regard to the cost of this power at distant points. Such cost will depend 
 entirelv on how much is taken and how far it is transmitto 1. 1 have simply taken 
 an illustrative case. I have assumed one-third of this total amount of power trans- 
 mitted a distance of 280 miles, which would lay it down substantially in what might 
 be called the center of gravity of the power market of the southern part of the State 
 of California: and under those circumstances, allowing similar charges, etc.. i) could 
 be laid down at this point in the southern part of the State of California for about
 
 68 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 four-tenths of a cent per kilowatt-hour. It would then, of course, remain to distribute 
 it in further detail. Those wlv> are familiar with the cost of power will see that there 
 is here a very attractive possibility f;>r p.nver users and at the same time at rates 
 which should provide a safe economic basis for the return of the investment, and not 
 only the return of the investment but of the interest charges at the same time. 
 
 In this connection and in answer to a question asked of Mr. Criswell I would state, 
 on behalf of the chief electrical engineer of the city of Los Angeles, that the losses 
 in transmission over a distance of 250 to 30Q miles and at a voltage of 220,000 volts 
 will average not far from 10 per cent and such loss has been assumed in the illustrative 
 case assumed. With somewhat higher voltages which may be looked for in the future 
 it is to be anticipated that this loss may, perhaps, be somewhat reduced. 
 
 The only further point I have had in mind and which I do believe is of impor- 
 tance is that with regard to the significance of this power at Boulder Canyon Dam in 
 reference to our soil reserves. Last week while here I had a conference with Director 
 Smith of the Geological Survey and was provided by him, as set forth in authorized 
 public information, with the latest estimates which have been made by a special 
 commission entrusted with the duty of determining, as far as was humanly possible, 
 the amount of our oil reserves. The amount of such reserves is represented by a 
 figure of about 9.000.000.000 barrels, according to the best estimate which can humanly 
 be made at the present time. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Does that include the shale oils? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Xo: I believe it does not include the shale oils; it is basically 
 the oils which are recoverable by methods at present approved and in use. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Is that in the entire United States or just in California? 
 
 Professor DURAND. That is in the entire United States. The amount of the re- 
 serves correspondingly on the Pacific coast, or in the State of California, is 2.000.000.000 
 barrels. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How does your estimate as to what this power could be produced for 
 at the Boulder Creek Dam compare with the cost of power per kilowatt hour now? 
 
 Professor DURAND. It is distinctly cheaper. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. About how much? 
 
 Professor DURAND. The present cost, of course, is extremely variable, depending 
 on circumstances. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well, on the average? 
 
 Professor DURAND. I should say perhaps 60 per cent of the average cost under other 
 conditions. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. This would be 60 per cent cheaper? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Xo: 40 per cent cheaper. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Forty per cent cheaper from the Boulder Canyon Dam than it is now 
 produced for? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Yes. sir. However, understand that that is a very general 
 statement. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I understand. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Do the figures you have give the length of time it would take us to 
 exhaust the 9.000.000.000 barn-is.' 
 
 Professor DURAND. I was just coming to that. Our present rate of production is 
 a little under 500.000,000 barrels per year and the consumption a little over 500.000.000 
 barrels, which means that we have to go abroad for the balance. If these various 
 conditions should continue about as they are we should, exhaust these resources in 
 about 20 years. 
 
 Director Smith points out. however, that, taken by itself, this statement might be 
 misleading, because conditions are not going to remain as they are. Our production 
 is apparently going up a little more; it is progressing toward a peak and then it will 
 gradually and neceeaarily decline. On the other hand, the future alone can determine 
 as to where our consumption may go in the meantime. This will involve questions of 
 world supply, of our representation in foreign fields, of the cost of imported oil and 
 other economic and industrial factors. But as Director Smith states, we shall go on 
 producing for some years to an increasing extent and then the production will gradually 
 decline, so that the total oil reserves in the United States will last beyond the 20-year 
 period. That is to say. there will be some oil of the reserves above referred to 'still 
 available 20 years hence and some 30 years hence. 
 
 Mr. Swixc;. lint importations will have to greatly increase? 
 
 Professor DUKAXD. Absolutely, and I was about to emphasize that very poin-t. 
 Importations will have to increase in order to balance the increased consumption. 
 Xow. if we equate the power at Boulder Canyon into fuel oil we find that the 600.000 
 horsepower a year equated into terms of oil represents something like 23.000,000 
 barrels.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 69 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. And the supply is inexhaustible? 
 
 Professor DURAND. And the supply is inexhaustible. That brings me to another 
 point, and I am glad you emphasized it in that way, because I had it especially in mind 
 to point out this fact: That when we are using oil we are using a deposit which was 
 made by nature by the sun primarily thousands or millions of years ago. and so 
 far as we know, nature is not engaged in the program of making oil at the present time. 
 Here is a bank deposit which lay untouched through geologic ages until a few years 
 ago, when we found out how to use it. We are now using up our principal, and when 
 anyone constantly draws on his bank principal, and there is no interest accruing, there 
 is only one end to the program. If instead, however, we utilize present day sun 
 power which, of course, water power is we are drawing on and living on an interest 
 account, and there is going to be just as much next year as there was last year, and so 
 on through an indefinite period of years. It; therefore, seems of the most fundamental 
 and serious importance that we should do our utmost to conserve the use of fuel oil 
 wherever possible by substituting therefor this interest-bearing account represented 
 by water power. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Not to be facetious, but really for information, when did old nature 
 cease to produce this oil? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Petroleum oils have apparently been formed in all geologic ages 
 from the Devonian through the CarboniferoOs down to the Pleocene and Pleistocene, 
 but presumably not in significant quantities since the latter period. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That was before my time, so I do not care to go into it. 
 
 Professor DURAND. There is one further point in this connection to which, I think, 
 attention should lie drawn. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. It seems to me the facts you are stating should be the basis of 
 a very good argument in favor of this legislation, because it would save the consump- 
 tion of fuel oils. 
 
 Professor DURAND. Quite so, and I feel that it is a very important argument. And 
 there is a further point, which relates to the same fundamental question. Petroleum 
 furnishes a wide range of products: thus the lighter products, such as gasoline, kero- 
 sene, engine distillate, etc., then heavier fuel oils, and again that mcst important series 
 of products, the lubricating oils. Indeed it is not too much to say that industrially 
 the entire world is lubricated by these special petroleum products. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I will ask that Professor Durand be permitted to file later a written 
 statement amplifying the remarks he has made to-day. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Without objection, that may be done. 
 
 Professor DURAND. In that connection let me add that water power represents a 
 practicable and effective substitute for fuel oil used for power purposes. This is not 
 true for the lighter petroleum products, and especially for the lubricating oils. It is 
 thus clear that there are certain products which we derive from petroleum and which 
 are fundamentally necessary in our modern civilization and which can, so far as we 
 can see, be derived from no other source. This serves to further emphasize the serious 
 import of this entire question of the use of our petroleum oil and points to the absolute 
 importance of substituting water power for oil fuel power wherever humanly possible 
 to do so, thus conserving pur petroleum reserves as far as possible for those uses for 
 which no substitute is available. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Is it your view that the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam 
 would be justified for the generation of power alone? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is your view as to whether or not the Government should under- 
 take the enterprise or private individuals or corporations undertake it? 
 
 Professor DURAND. Are you speaking of the dam? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The Boulder Canyon Dam and all this development. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You mean from a power point of view? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I am speaking about power. He said it would justify its construction 
 for power. I am asking for the professor's point of view as a man of great experience, 
 as to the relative advantage of having the Government construct it, or having it con- 
 structed by private enterprise. 
 
 Professor DURAND. As I see it, Mr. Raker, the only agent which could adequately 
 proceed with the construction of such engineering work is the National Government, 
 having in view particularly the interrelation of the problems of irrigation, flood 
 control, and the settlement of the various questions in controversy among the several 
 States that will arise not only in connection with the construction of the work, but 
 later on in connection with trie operation of the reservoir. I believe that the Federal 
 Government is the only agent which could undertake this proposition, especially 
 having in view this particular aspect of the situation.
 
 70 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 I would further point out, however, that in my opinion it is most desirable and most 
 important, both for the Federal Government and for the communities or political 
 subdivisions interested, that provision be made, as in section 5 of the pending bill, 
 for time payments on the capital cost of the project, thus constituting in a way these 
 communities or political subdivisions as partners with the Federal Government in 
 the enterprise and greatly reducing the capital outlay required from the Federal 
 Treasury. 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. Have you made any estimate of the time when the Government 
 would be fully reimbursed by the sale of power? 
 
 Professor PURAND. An annual charge of 2i per cent invested on a sinking fund basis 
 at 5 per cent interest would provide for the retirement of the bonds in a period of about 
 23 years. Section 5 of the pending bill provides for distributed annual paymen's 
 covering capital cost in 25 years. I believe that the territory interested in this project 
 will be eager to take power from this source at figures which v\ill insure the repayment 
 of the capital expenditure in a period of 25 or 30 years, and including as well, all 
 interest charges on the same. 
 
 Regarding the matter of oil reserves I would like to mention one further point, and 
 that is that there is in that section of the country, immediately tributary to the Colo- 
 rado River, a consumption of oil annually of something like 13,000.000 barrels by the 
 railroads. That is one item which apparently could be wiped off the slate of con- 
 sumption, once we bring about the utilization of electrical power by the railroads 
 which, of course, is contemplated as one of the definite features of the market for this 
 power. In addition to that something like 4,000.000 barrels are being burned under 
 boilers in miscellaneous ways, making at the present time an aggregate of 17,000.000 
 barrels that could be immediately saved. This figure of 23,000,000 barrels per year 
 represents therefore a very definite and important item of saving, having in view our 
 total California reserves of something like 2,000,000,000 barrels. 
 
 Or again, looking beyond the Boulder Canyon project to the total power possibilities 
 of the Colorado River, we should have a total fuel oil equivalent of some 10 times as 
 much or 230,000,000 barrels per year, which is something more than one-tenth of the 
 entire reserve of fuel oil in the California region at the present time. 
 
 All these things drive home, it seems to me, the very great importance of realizing 
 at the earliest practicable moment this vast undertaking of national conservation. 
 
 There are many other points of which mention might be made, but I will not take 
 up the time of the committee further. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I will ask permission that the statement of the Geological Survey be 
 made a part of the record. 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT. Without objection, that may be inserted in the record. 
 
 We are very much obliged to you, Professor, for your very interesting and instruc- 
 tive statement. 
 
 (The statement of the Geological Survey is as follows:) 
 
 THE OIL SUPPLY OF THE UNITED STATES ESTIMATES MADE BY THE COUNTRY'S 
 FOREMOST OIL GEOLOGISTS. 
 
 A review of the producing, probable, and possible oil-bearing regions in the United 
 States by a joint committee composed of members of the American Association of 
 Petroleum Geologists and of the United States Geological Survey has resulted in an 
 inventory estimate that 9,000,000,000 barrels of oil recoverable 'by methods now in 
 use remained in the ground in this country January 1. H)22. 
 
 Unlike our reserves of coal, iron, and copper, which are so large that apprehension 
 of their early exhaustion is not justified, the oil reserves of the country, as the public 
 has frequently been warned, appear adequate to .supply the demand for only a limited 
 number of years. The annual production of the country is now almost half a billion 
 barrels, but the annual consumption, already well beyond the half billion mark, is 
 still growing. Tor some years we have had to import oil, and with the growth in de- 
 mand, our dependence on foreign oil has become steadily greater, in spite of our own 
 increase in output. It is therefore evident that the people of the United States should 
 be informed as fully as possible as to the reserves now left in this country, for without 
 such information we can not appraise our probable dependence upon foreign supplies 
 of oil, on the expanding use of which so much of modern civilization depends. 
 
 Fortunately estimates of our oil reserves can be made with far greater completeness 
 and accuracy than ever before. During the last eight years a large part of the territory 
 in the United States that may possibly contain oil has been studied in great detail by 
 oil ge-i!ii,';-is: wildcatting has spread through "prospective" into many regions of 
 "possible" and locally even into regions of "impossible" territory; old fields have
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 71 
 
 been definitely outlined and new ones discovered; and finally, improvement in 
 methods and special training in the calculation of oil reserves and of the depletion of 
 oil properties have been developed to meet the requirements of the tax laws. Ac- 
 cordingly, in order that the public may get the fullest benefit of this newly available 
 information, the United States Geological Survey in March, 1921, invited the American 
 Association of Petroleum Geologists to cooperate with it in a review of the producing, 
 probable, and possible oil territory of the United States and in the compilation of an 
 estimate of the petroleum remaining in the ground and recoverable by present methods. 
 This invitation was promptly accepted by the association, which designated a number 
 of its ablest members of well-known wide experience, good judgment, and high pro- 
 fessional standing to serve with the oil geologists of the survey as members of a joint 
 committee. 
 
 The committee responsible for the original preparation of the estimates and finally 
 for the adjustment and revision of the results in joint conference comprised F. W. 
 DeWolf, State geologist of Illinois: W. E. \V rather, of Dallas, Tex. ; Roswell H. Johnson, 
 of Pittsburgh, Pa.: Wallace A. Pratt, of Houston, Tex.; Alexander W. McCoy, of 
 Bartlesville, Okla.; Carl H. Beal, of San Francisco, Calif.: C. T. Lupton, of Denver, 
 Colo.; Alexander Deussen, of Houston, Tex.: K. C. Heald, of Washington, D. C.; 
 and G. C. Matson, of Tulsa, Okla., all representing the American Association of 
 Petroleum Geologists: and, for the Federal Survey, David White, chief geologist, 
 chairman: W. T. Thorn, jr., A. E. Fath, Kirtly F. Mather, R. C. Moore, State geologist 
 of Kansas, and K. C. Heald. Mr. Heald represented both the survey and the asso- 
 ciation. These men were assisted in subcommittees by a large number of the leading 
 oil geologists of the'country, including oil-company geologists, directors of State geo- 
 logical surveys, and consulting geologists, who were especially familiar with the 
 regions considered. All these cooperated whole-heartedly in the canvas of our oil 
 reserves, and many oil companies also furnished confidential data for use in the 
 preparation of estimates. 
 
 The calculations of the oil reserves in the proved and discovered fields are reasonably 
 reliable, and those for regions regarded by the geologists as embracing "probable" 
 future oil fields are based on all the available data and are entitled to high respect, 
 but the committee wishes it most clearly understood that the estimates of oil in 
 "possible" territory are absolutely speculative and hazardous and that, although 
 they represent the best judgment of the geologists, they nevertheless may be, at 
 least in part, wildly erroneous. The questions involved are not only how much a 
 particular doubtful region will yield, but whether it will furnish any oil whatever. 
 On the whole the estimates are undoubtedly the best that have ever been made for 
 the United States and better than have hitherto been prepared for any oil country 
 or district of the world . 
 
 The estimates for local areas, fields, or districts have been consolidated by States, 
 groups of States, or broad regions in the case of nonproductive States. 
 
 Estimated oil reserves of the United States, by States or regions. 
 
 Barrels. 
 
 New York 100, 000, 000 
 
 Pennsylvania 260, 000, 000 
 
 West Virginia 200, 000, 000 
 
 Ohio 190, 000, 000 
 
 Indiana and Michigan 70, 000, 000 
 
 Illinois 440, 000, 000 
 
 Kentucky, Tennessee, northern Alabama, and northeastern Mis- 
 sissippi 175, 000, 000 
 
 Missouri, Iowa, North Dakota, Wisconsin, and Minnesota 40, 000, 000 
 
 Kansas 425, 000, 000 
 
 Oklahoma 1, 340, 000, 000 
 
 Northern Louisiana and Arkansas 525, 000, 000 
 
 Texas, except Gulf coast (i70, 000, 000 
 
 Gulf coast, Texas, and Louisiana 2, 100, 000, 000 
 
 Colorado, New Mexico, and Arizona 50, 000, 000 
 
 Wyoming 525, 000, 000 
 
 Montana, Nebraska, and South Dakota 100. ()0<). 000 
 
 Utah, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho 80, 000, 000 
 
 California 1, 850, 000, 000 
 
 Eastern Gulf, Coastal Plain, and Atlantic Coast States 10, 000, 000 
 
 Total 9, 150, 000, 000
 
 72 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 The New England States are regarded as top unpromising to deserve considera- 
 tion. Most of the northern peninsula of Michigan and the State of Minnesota are 
 placed in the same category. The small quantities allocated to some other States 
 indicate how little hope these geologists have of finding extensive oil fields in them. 
 Some of these very doubtful regions will give no oil, but others will make good the 
 deficiencies. The estimates are as a whole distinctlv conservative. 
 
 Of the total estimated oil reserves of the United States, amounting in round num- 
 bers to 9,000,000,000 barrels, 5,000,000,000 barrels may be classified as oil in sight 
 and 4,000,000,000 barrels as prospective and possible. Rather more than 4,000,000,000 
 barrels should be assigned to the heavy-oil group. These oils will be recovered 
 mainly in the Pacific Coast, Rocky Mountain, and Gulf States. The contents of 
 the Lima-Indiana region, which yields oil of a distinctive type, are estimated at 
 40,000,000 barrels. In general, the so-called paraffin oils of moderate and high 
 grade, as contrasted with the heavier oils, amount in all to about 5,000,000,000 barrels. 
 The estimated reserves of high-grade oils of the Appalachian States are about 
 725,000,000 barrels. 
 
 The estimated reserves are enough to satisfy the present requirements of the United 
 States for only 20 years, if the oil could be taken out of the ground as fast as it is wanted . 
 Should these estimates fall even so much as 2.000.000,000 barrels short of the actual 
 recovery, that error of 22 per cent would be equivalent to but four years' supply, a 
 relatively short extension of life. However, the committee expressly decries the too 
 frequent assumption that inasmuch as the estimated reserves appear to be sufficient to 
 meet the needs of the country at the present rate of consumption for 20 years, therefore 
 the reserves will be exhausted at the end of that time or, at most, a few years later. 
 This assumption is absolutely misleading, for the oil pools will not all be found that 
 length of time, drilling will be spread over many years., as the pools are found, and the 
 wells can not be pumped dry so quickly. Individual wells will yield oil for more 
 than a quarter of a century and some of the wells will not have been drilled in 1950. 
 In short, the oil can not all be discovered, much less taken from the earth, in 20 years. 
 The United States is already absolutelv dependent on foreign countries to eke out 
 her own production, and if the foreign oil can be procured, this dependence is sure to 
 grow greater and greater as our own fields wane, except as artificial patroleum may be 
 produced by the distillation of oil shales and coals, or some substitute for petroleum 
 may be discovered. 
 
 All the estimates except those for one region, noted below, include only the oil 
 recoverable from the ground by present methods, but it is practically certain that the 
 percentage of oil to be recovered from the American oil fields will be vastly increased 
 by the application of new and improved methods of recovery. At present, however, 
 this phase of production may be regarded as in the experimental stage. Little has benn 
 definitely determined as to the applicability of "air pressure," "water drive," "gas 
 pressure," "vacuum extraction," and other new methods to different regions, with their 
 variation in conditions, or to the increase in production to be counted on from the use 
 of these methods. The committee therefore feels that at present any estimates of such 
 possible additional recoveries would probably contain errors enormously greater than 
 those inherent in the estimates made on the basis of methods now in use. In only one 
 region are the geologic conditions so well known and the experience with improved 
 methods on a commercial basis so extensive and so long continued as to justify the 
 formulation of estimates based on the results obtained. This is the region in north- 
 western Pennsylvania and southwestern New York where the "water drive" is now 
 employed to obtain oil from the Bradford sand, which was supposed to be largely ex- 
 hausted. Under the peculiar conditions there the use of this method will result in the 
 recovery of a large quantity of oil that can not be recovered by ordinary methods of 
 production. Allowance for the additional oil thus recovered has therefore been made 
 in the estimates. It has already been found, however, that this method is not appli- 
 cable to some other districts, and accordingly no allowance has been made for possible 
 additional recovery through its use where its suitability to the local conditions has not 
 been actually demonstrated. 
 
 In the light of these estimates as to the extent of our supplies of natural petroleum, 
 the joint committee points out the stern obligation of the citizen, the producer, and 
 the Government to give most serious study to the more complete extraction of the oil 
 from the ground, as well as to the avoidance of waste, either through direct losses or 
 through misuse of crude oil or its products. 
 
 (Thereupon the committee adjourned to meet to-morrow. Thursday, June 22, 1922, 
 at 10.30 o'clock.) 
 
 X
 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
 LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
 
 SECOND SESSION 
 / 
 
 ON 
 
 H. R. 11449 
 
 By Mr. SWING 
 
 A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT 
 OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 PART 3 
 
 JUNE 22, 23, 24, 1922 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 131(i 1922
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. 
 
 MOSES P. KINKAID, Nebraska, Chairman. 
 
 NICHOLAS J. SINNOTT, Oregon. CARL HAYDEN, Arizona. 
 
 EDWARD C. LITTLE, Kansas. C. B. HUDSPETH, Texas. 
 
 ADDISON T. SMITH, Idaho. JOHN E. RAKER, California. 
 
 JOHN W. SUMMERS, Washington. HOMER L. LYON, North Carolina. 
 
 HENRY E. B ARBOUR, California. WILLIAM B. BANKHEAD, Alabama. 
 
 E. O. LEATHERWOOD, Utah. 
 WILLIAM WILLIAMSON, South Dakota. 
 SAMUEL S. ARENTZ, Nevada. 
 MANUEL HERRICK, Oklahoma. 
 
 A. R. HUMPHREY, Clerk.
 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER 
 
 BASIN, 
 
 COMMITEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS, 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 Thursday, June 22, 1922. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Edward C. Little presiding. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Gentlemen, the committee will please come to order. I under- 
 stand that Mr. Bacon is to speak first this morning. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Before you proceed with that, Mr. Chairman, there has been so 
 much said about the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 
 case of the State of Wyoming versus the State of Colorado, the Greeley-Poudre 
 irrigation district, and the Laramie-Poudre Reservoirs & Irrigation Co., that 
 I would ask that the decision in that case, No. 3. original. October term, 1921, 
 'be printed in the record, so as to have it at the beginning here. fc 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is there any objection? If not, that will be done. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I have the decision here. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Might I suggest. Judge, that probably you do not want to put 
 it all in? You might designate the parts that you wish to insert. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. No ; there is nothing that you can leave out in reading it. 
 
 The decision referred to by consent of the committee is to be printed follow- 
 ing the statement of Director Davis. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Now, Mr. Bacon, will you address the committee? Please state 
 your name, residence, and sufficient of your antecedents to shed light upon the 
 reason for your appearance here. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. JOHN L. BACON, MAYOR OF SAN DIEGO, CALIF. 
 
 Mr. BACON. My name is John L. Bacon, mayor of the city of San Diego, and 
 representing the Southern Branch of the California League of Municipalities. 
 
 Some time ago the matter of Boulder Canyon was brought to the attention 
 of the organization in California which represents all of the municipalities of 
 the State of California that is, the League of California Municipalities. We 
 had not realized the gravity of the situation and knew very little about it. This 
 matter was brought up about a year ago. Some information was given at that 
 meeting and later a meeting was called of the southern branch of this organiza- 
 tion, known as the Southern Branch of the California League of Municipalities, 
 and action was taken at that meeting to get further information and to see 
 what could be done to relieve this serious situation in the Imperial Valley. We 
 went into it at some length, and about that time various Government reports 
 were coming in ; various investigations had been made and Mr. Swing introduced 
 his bill before the House which you are now considering. 
 
 When it was known that this bill was coming up the organization got further 
 information and then requested that some representative be sent on to Washing- 
 ton to lay this information before the committee. 
 
 The one thing that appeals to us most strongly is the imminent danger of flood 
 in the Imperial Valley. We did not even realize it out there until we com- 
 menced to investigate. You see, California is a State of magnificent distances, 
 and we do not always realize our neighbor's difficulties. 
 
 Before coming out here I took a trip down into Mexico on this project to be 
 sure that I had the facts. There was some feeling of apprehension before, and 
 after going down there there was a feeling of actual terror in connection with 
 it. It is pretty hard to point out I did not realize it, and I realize that it is 
 infinitely harder to give any idea here of the awful danger that threatens that 
 valley. 
 
 To go back a little ways, this map here I think will show more clearly than 
 anything else the situation. There is a peculiar condition existing here that I 
 
 73
 
 74 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 do not think exists anywhere else in this country. It was not very long since 
 that the ocean beach line followed this line up around through here [indicating 
 map of Imperial Valley and vicinity] and came up through here. This was all 
 ocean. When I say " not very long since." I am speaking from a geological 
 standpoint. That was only a few hundred years. Imperial Valley was all under 
 water at that time. This was part of the ocean [indicating Imperial Valley 
 and vicinity]. 
 
 The Colorado River, coming down here [indicating], as it follows down its 
 channel brings more or less silt with it dirt. There is not a man here but 
 what has watched perhaps these little spring freshets that come in every part 
 of the country, where a groove or a gulley will be washed down the side of the 
 hill, and then when you reach your lowland at the bottom, where it is flat, the 
 dirt that has been brought down from that gulley will spread out and form 
 sort of a little triangular mound. The dirt washing down the side hills makes 
 this mound and builds up the lowland. You have probably seen some lowlands 
 built up 3 or 4 feet. That is exactly what took place here. The mud which 
 came down this river built up a sort of a delta here until gradually it built up 
 a mound out here [indicating], and the river was diverted and came out through 
 here where these dotted Tnes are [indicating]. This water then evaporated and 
 left a great deep basin 300 feet below sea level, and there is no way to drain it; 
 it is simply a basin there down below the level of the ocean. 
 
 Now, in the course of time this river repeated its process, and instead of 
 filling up over in here [indicating], it has filled up this portion, with the result 
 that the river n*>w is attempting to break back into irs old basin [indicating]. 
 It did break through in 1905. and it took a year and a half to stop the break. 
 In the meantime the Saitoh Sea was gradually filling up. S'nce that date this 
 whole delta has filled up about 13 feet. 
 
 You can get some idea of the amount of mud brought down that river when 
 from a rough calculation it is found that that mud. if dumped on the District 
 of Columbia, would raise the level of the land in the District of Columbia about 
 3 feet every year. In other words, there is enough mud ; n that river to put a 
 layer of mud 3 feet deep over the entire District of Columbia every year. 
 
 Now. here is the situation : A series of levees were put in here in an effort 
 to control the river. Each year the river has brought down this mud and 
 built up the delta on the river side of the levee. It is getting higher and higher 
 all the time. We checked that up last week. Mr. Swing telegraphed back to 
 get the actual elevation, and we found that since 1908 the point right there 
 at Volcano Lake levee [indicating] has risen 16 feet higher than it was. That 
 river bed has raised 16 feet since 1908. This point is about 35 feet lower 
 than the point right here at Bee River and Pascadero Cut where the river is 
 now [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Will you say that again, please? 
 
 Mr. BACON. About the elevation? 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. BACON. This map to-day is not correct, because the land is changing so 
 fast. It may be correct to-day, and this i< as dose an approach to correctness 
 as we can get. That just shows you how the river changes. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. In what way is it not correct? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Because the river bed is constantly changing. A tree may come 
 down there, lodge against the side of the levee, and the current may scour out 
 and break the levee, simply from a tree coming down. That could happen in 
 half an hour, and has happened in half an hour. 
 
 Here is a map gotten out by the United States Geological Survey in 1908. 
 It is not quite the same scale as that map is [indicating], but you can see what 
 that is, as shown on the map here. Now, that map was correct in 1908. To-day 
 all of this land down in here has been filled up. with the result that that 
 river has been forced, as you can see. off to the left toward Imperial Valley. 
 This year an effort was made to control the river and force it through here 
 at Pascadero Cut. It was successful, but from an engineering standpoint I 
 can not see how it can last over three or four years. It is a race against time 
 to keep the river out of that valley. If it ever breaks in, I don't see how they 
 can ever stop it. When the river broke here in 1905, it washed a great deep 
 u r ull\ . starting here at Salton Sea. and gradually it is. working back across the 
 border into Mexico beyond Calexico way up to this point. Now. that gully 
 only has about 35 miles farther to go to hit the river this time. That time it 
 cut over 40 miles. Once it cuts that gully, they tell us it will scour right back 
 up here and probably take out the Yuma Bridge, part of the town of Yuma,
 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 75 
 
 and will work back pretty well up toward Laguna Dam. Laguna Dam is built 
 on bed rock, so it can not scour out. It will probably be a century and a half 
 before any of tbat valley can ever be used again if that happens. It will not 
 fill up over night, but it will fill up in a series of years. You can not stop the 
 river once it breaks through. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now, take Volcano Lake and the dam from the western point. 
 From where the dam begins what is the elevation of that as compared with the 
 Gulf of Mexico? 
 
 Mr. BACON. To-day this land [indicating] is 40 feet above sea level. This is 
 about 250 feet above sea level. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But I just wanted to get before the committee the relative eleva- 
 tion along Volcano Lake, where the embankment is, and the Gulf of Mexico. 
 You say it is about 40 feet elevation? 
 
 Mr. BACON. About 40 feet. This is 40 feet above sea level right at that point 
 there [indicating]. It is 76 feet above sea level at this point here at the Vol- 
 cano Lake levee, and the top of this levee is 28 feet below the water level at 
 Pasoadero Cut and the Bee River. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. Please designate that levee so that we can refer to it later in the 
 record. 
 
 Mr. BACON. The Volcano Lake levee? 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. That commences from the west, or on the west, near by the rail- 
 road and runs on across to the point how is it marked there? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Black Butte. 
 
 Mr. RAKER, About what is the size of Volcano Lake now? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not know. I do not want to give you that information, 
 because I do not have it correct, and Mr. Nickerson can give you that far more 
 accurately than I can. 
 
 Now. in order that you might have some idea of the magnitude of this I took 
 some photographs down there. These photographs are less than a month old, 
 so that they are fresh. They will give you an idea of the condition. This was 
 taken right up there at the point marked Bee River and shows the levee at that 
 particular point. 
 
 Here is another photograph, which show T s it a little more clearly, and a third 
 photograph shows the intake to the canal. 
 
 Now. just to show some of the difficulties that the Imperial Valley people 
 are meeting with I want to say in explanation that as far as San Diego and 
 some of the cities are concerned we have very little to gain or very little to lose 
 in connection with this, excepting as Imperial Valley gains or loses. That is 
 the feeling in San Diego, but we feel that the situation there is so serious that 
 it is our neighbors problem, and we are trying to do everything we can to help 
 them solve it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Do you not go farther than that? You have got a wonderful 
 valley, producing almost everything on earth, with a wonderful State boulevard, 
 a highway across the mountains, and also a railroad. All those things are 
 concerned. 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes ; but we consider that the seriousness of our neighbor's posi- 
 tion there the serious difficulty that faces them is the thing we are really 
 worried about. If that river should break, it would wipe out the Southern 
 Pacific Railroad down here, take out the canal system, and flood the valley; it 
 would take out the Southern Pacific Railroad up through here along the Salton 
 Sea [indicating] : it would wipe out that region there absolutely. 
 
 Mr. I'ARKori:. About how large is that region you have just referred to that 
 would be practically destroyed? 
 
 Mr. BACON. It would destroy over half a million acres of as fertile land as 
 there is in this country. 
 
 .Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Do you know the population there and the assessed 
 valuation of the property that is in jeopardy? 
 
 Mr. BACOX. The assessed value of the property is between seventy-live 
 and one hundred million dollars, and the population between 50,000 and 
 75,000. 
 
 Air. RAKER. That is all on the California side? 
 
 Air. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How much is there on the Mexican side? 
 
 Air. BACON. I do not know. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now. I am not at all squeamish on this matter. I think you 
 people ought to be open and aboveboard and give us the entire territory 
 involved and how much it affects, not only as to ourselves, but the other fellows.
 
 76 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 because you people are dividing that water now, and while we are for the 
 United States I believe that it is the proper thing to plan out the whole 
 question involved relative to what we are working on, and I hope you will not 
 just leave out the other fellow's interests, because the whole railroad to 
 Yuma until it gets across the California line is involved also, is it not? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And we ought to see the whole picture at once, ought we not? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. BARBOTTB. How would you determine the assessed valuation of land 
 in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I would not determine it, because I do not have the information. 
 I am not trying to withhold any figures, but I do not have them. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Can you give the area under cultivation and the num- 
 ber of people on the farms? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I did not mean the assessed valuation. The only thing I was 
 asking or speaking of was that this not only involves the railroad which 
 brings traffic from the East, from this great valley on into San Diego. Los 
 Angeles, and the West generally, but there are a great many interests and 
 people South that are now using part of that water. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I can not answer that question, Mr. Chairman. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. As Mr. Nickerson is to speak later, I believe, he can state it 
 then. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. That data, I might say, is all included in the Davis report. 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes ; on page 20 you will find that matter laid out. It would 
 mean simply quoting figures from the map if I gave them to you. 
 
 Mr. RAKER, Well, it does not matter. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Will you please mark these figures before you go, so that we 
 will know just what they are? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. What is your profession. Mr. Bacon? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Engineeer. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Civil engineer? 
 
 Mr. BACON. No, sir; I have had general engineering practice largely on 
 construction work out in California, but I would not want to pose as an 
 expert in connection with this matter, because this is a specialized branch 
 of engineering that you have had expert advice on already from your Recla- 
 mation Department. Our feeling is just this in connection with this project: 
 We realize the danger ; we are in actual fear, almost terror, in connection 
 with it. We do not want to even suggest how it should be corrected. We 
 believe that the Government departments have investigated and determined 
 how the dangers there in that valley can be righted, and we are simply ac- 
 cepting the Government reports and say that we indorse them in every way. 
 
 In connection with this, this matter has been taken up and there has not 
 been one single dissenting voice among the California cities so far as I know. 
 The widest publicity that we can give in a short time has been given to it, and 
 I have original indorsements and resolutions that have been passed by some 
 20 cities in California, adopted since the 1st of May. in support of the pro- 
 position. I want to say a little further that we have not always been unani- 
 mous in our opinions out there. We have had our local disputes. There has 
 been a little jealously sometimes between the cities, but in this particular in- 
 stance all of that end of California is working solidly together. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is the attitude of the railroad company relative to this 
 project, so far as it affects their property, do you know? 
 
 Mr. BACON. They are anxious to see it go through, so far as I know. I 
 know very little except just general hearsay. I believe these is a feeling of 
 anxiety on their part. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is the attitude of the Californians who own the Mexican 
 land, land on the Mexican border? Do you know? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not know. It would simply be hearsay, anything that I 
 could say. Mr. Xickerson can give you exact figures in connection with that. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Very well. 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not want to give you figures that I am just guessing at. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How much time have you spent recently in Imperial Valley and 
 in this adjacent country? 
 
 Mr. BACON. This last time? 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Yes.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIST. 77 
 
 Mr. BACON. This last trip I was only down there three days. I have been 
 there going to and from the Imperial Valley, I presume, for six or eight years. 
 I own a little property over there, but not tery much. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Just tell us. if you can, how the expense of the new diversion 
 dam is allocated between those various parties, in a rough way. Part of the 
 water is used in California, part is used across the Mexican border, and the 
 railroad company has its property there. Do you know offhand what that 
 division is? 
 
 Mr. BACON. All I can do is to give you the information I got from their 
 engineers. The engineers told me that all of the protective work here, every 
 cent that is spent on these levees, every cent that is spent in protecting this 
 property, and every cent that is spent in keeping the river out, is paid for by the 
 land in Imperial Valley on the American side of the border; that the Mexican 
 lands bear no share whatever in this protective work. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUB. And all of that protective work that you refer to lies in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. BACON. It all lies in Mexico. They told me that last year here is a 
 very interesting thing that shows you some of the difficulties they are working 
 under they told me that last year they spent approximately $60.000 in duties 
 which were paid to the Mexican Government on material which went down into 
 Mexico and was used on Mexican soil to protect this land ; that over half a 
 million dollars was spent on this protective work, and that the $60,000 had to 
 be paid in duties. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That tract of land lying north and west of this embankment is 
 on the Mexican side, and the necessity for its protection is the same as that 
 on the California side? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And you say those people in Mexico have paid nothing towards 
 the $60.000 that you have been talking about? 
 
 Mr. BACON. It is more than $60,000; $60,000 was simply the duty. About a 
 half million dollars was spent on the work and they have not paid one cent for 
 this. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. They made these people pay a duty, and then they paid nothing 
 for putting the work in? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. Here is another example : There was a minor break 
 in the levee, which it was very necessary to close. Men were sent down there 
 hurriedly ; supplies were sent down ; a train was made up carrying emergency 
 supplies for these men and carrying additional men, and through the officious- 
 iiess of some under-official in Mexico that train was held up for 11 hours at 
 the boundary line until word could be gotten to the higher Mexican officials to 
 release the train and allow it to go down into Mexico. That is just one of the 
 difficulties that is met with in that connection. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I may seem a little peculiar in my questions, but I think all of 
 these matters throw light on why you people are figuring for the ail-American 
 canal. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Do you favor this all-American canal project? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir ; it does not seem right that the American farmers here 
 in this district should be at the mercy of the Mexican Government, which is 
 here to-day and gone to-morrow. The Mexican Government changes almost as 
 often as the river does. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Are there any more questions to ask of Mr. Bacon? 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Has the question been discussed among the people in 
 southern California as to the advisability of negoti.-iting with the Government 
 of Mexico for the transfer of that section to the United States? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not think anything could be done by the Federal Govern- 
 ment that would be hailed with greater joy than the acquiring of that land 
 down in Lower California by this Government. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Might it not be a good idea for the people interested 
 to initiate a proposition of that kind and have it presented to the Secretary of 
 State? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Let me observe that the legislature of the State of California 
 memorialized Congress to purchase that land several years ago, but nothing 
 has been done and nothing can be done, because the constitution of Mexico 
 prohibits the alienation of any territory of Mexico. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Let me ask you just a couple of questions. You have some in- 
 terest in Imperial Valley and I suppose you have met their chambers of com- 
 merce and landowners and prospective landowners. This all-American canal 
 is estimated to cost about $30,000,000.
 
 78 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. It is the view of your people that you are ready and willing to 
 reimburse the Government if intrusted construction to reimburse the Govern- 
 ment for the money expended in building this all-American canal? 
 
 Mr. BACON. That is my understanding. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. With a reasonable rate of interest? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I have not been actively enough connected with affairs down in 
 the valley to be sure about that. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Who is ready to present those facts to the committee? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Mr. Nickerson can give you all those facts. I do not want to 
 duplicate what he will say. He is president of the Imperial irrigation district 
 and is thoroughly conversant with the valley. He is one of the pioneers of the 
 valley and understands absolutely the entire problem from start to finish. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Mr. Bacon, would the city of San Diego be directly interested 
 in this power development as a prospective purchaser of a portion of the power? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I think not only the city of San Diego but every city in Cali- 
 fornia that could possibly come in under this project would be glad to get all 
 the power it can. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Can you, as mayor, now give us any definite assurance that the 
 city of San Diego will purchase part of the power and pay a reasonable price 
 for it? 
 
 Mr. BACON. No; not absolute assurance, outside of a guess as to what would 
 be done, because, as you understand, it would mean a bond issue, and until 
 the bond issue was carried you are not sure of anything. But I will say we 
 are as sure of that as we are of anything that is to take place in the future 
 in connection with the municipality. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. But it is your opinion that they will take a certain amount 
 of that power and will be willing to pay a reasonable price for it? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. That is a question, of course, that we will have to meet, as to 
 what will become of this power and whether there will be really a market for 
 it sufficient to enable the Government to reimburse itself for this cost of con- 
 struction. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Does the city of San Diego own its own power plant 
 now. or does it purchase from private concerns? 
 
 Mr. BACON. We own our water plant. We have our own water system, but 
 we do not own a power plant. But I think when it came to the qxiestion of 
 the distribution of power the difficulty would not be to dispose of the power; 
 the difficulty would be in allocating the power among the people who will 
 want it. 
 
 There is just one other thing I would like to submit in connection with this. 
 Just as I was leaving my office to come East, the May 1 issue of the Journal 
 of Electricity and Western Industry was dropped on my desk, and in it I 
 find an article by Mr. C. E. Grunsky, who was one of the engineers that had 
 to do with the building of the Panama Canal, containing an airplane photograph 
 of this district, which probably will show more graphically than anything else 
 just what those conditions are. This photograph carries this caption : " The 
 major argument for immediate action on the Colorado." This shows the sec- 
 tion immediately south and east of the Volcano Lake Levee and will fit on the 
 map just about like that [indicating], with the upper left-hand corner of the 
 picture fitting against the Volcano Lake Levee. That shows how the river 
 comes down there and breaks out when it hits this heavily underbrushed sec- 
 tion down here [indicating], and then after spreading out and dropping its 
 silt, it comes back and gathers into more or less of a stream and goes down 
 into the ocean. This whole section here is just building up [indicating]. It 
 is interesting as showing about how that river looks ; it looks like a great 
 big devilfish reaching out for something, and I think that just about describes 
 the condition of the river, it is a great big devilfish reaching out over into 
 the valley and trying every way to get there. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Could that be reproduced for the record. I wonder? 
 
 Mr. BACON. If you see fit. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Those resolutions that you said you had, do you want to intro- 
 duce those in the record? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I should like to ; yes. I have the original copies here. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. For 40 or 50 years before there was any development of the 
 Imperial Valley, and when the railroad was built down through the Imperial 
 Valley on the west side, where the Salton Sea is now, there was no water run-
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 79 
 
 ning in there and no one was making any pretense of keeping the water out. 
 What brought about the change? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Simply this: There was a pretty well denned delta built up 
 there with the river running along this eastern edge. Now the silt kept coming 
 down. There is a high line of hills here, a mesa [indicating]. That silt gradu- 
 ally tilled up this marshy land at the mouth of the river, and the river gradually 
 came back here. Each year that added quantity of silt filled that up until the 
 delta was raised to such a point that the river started breaking off in this direc- 
 tion toward the valley. Now this was down in Mexico. If you have ever 
 been over in that country you know you know it dosn't look as though there 
 ever could have been a drop of water in it. Naturally there was no apprehen- 
 sion felt at all by the railroad people when they built that railroad, but within 
 the last few years there has been great apprehension. The change has been 
 taking place so gradually that nobody noticed it. but now it is getting up to 
 the danger point. Probably in prehistoric times it was 100 feet deep there, 
 but the silt gradually filled up this whole delta. You have exactly the same 
 situation on the Delta of the Nile and the Delta of the Mississippi. It forms 
 a cone pretty well defined by these little branches of the river [indicating], 
 and then it breaks on one side or the other of the cone and keeps breaking, and 
 each year the silt adds that much more mud to the river bed and it breaks 
 again, and now it is attempting to break each time over toward the valley, be- 
 cause all this land here has been filled up [indicating]. 
 
 ' Mr. RAKER. Then, none of the works that have been put in the river in an 
 attempt to divert the water have had any effect relative to this water breaking 
 over west and north? It just comes naturally? 
 
 Mr. BACON. It just comes naturally. The works tend to keep it east try to 
 force it east but the constant tendency of the river is to break over west. 
 Every time it has broken it pushes its way farther toward the valley, until if 
 that river had been left alone in 1908 it would to-day be flowing right down 
 tlirouu'h here, down through the valley here [indicating]. There would be the 
 course of the river and it would continue to flow there until this entire area was 
 scoured out. 
 
 Mr. HAKKK. Let me ask you this question. In the protection of the Imperial 
 Valley, would we be doing this for American citizens? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. I think it would be the greatest calamity of modern 
 times for that river to break into that valley. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. I hope you got my question. I am asking you now if this develop- 
 ment would be entirely for the benefit of American citizens? 
 
 Mr. P>A>.\. Entirely? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yes. 
 
 Mr. BACON. No ; Mexico is bound to reap a little benefit from it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well, then, in California and in Imperial Valley, we would be 
 doing this improvement and protecting the homes and farms of the American 
 citizens? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir ; absolutely. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Has any estimate been made of the length of time that 
 it would take the Salton Sea basin to fill up if the entire river were deflected 
 into it? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir; I have had an estimate made of that kind and checked 
 it myself before I came out here. It would require approximately 15 years 
 to fill up completely, and it would require approximately, if it filled up, prob- 
 ably five or six years more to silt up here so that you would commence to get 
 an evaporation process again. It would probably take 7. r > or 100 years to 
 evaporate. 
 
 It will continue to run into here until this is silled up again. You will 
 have duplicated the process you had several hundred years ago and then it 
 will break over on this side again, and it will just keep alternating back and 
 forth through periods of 300 or 400 years. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I am always in favor of protecting any of our people. Is there 
 anything in the statement that has been going around that Imperial Valley is 
 practically being colonized by Japanese and .Mexicans? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not think there is a thing in it. Now. here is probably 
 what that statement is founded on : This section in here 
 
 Mr. LITTLE (interposing). In Mexico? 
 
 Mr. BACON. In Mexico. This section in here in Mexico [indicating] is 
 being worked by foreign labor entirely and there is where the danger to the 
 American farmer comes from.
 
 80 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Where is most of that land owned? Who owns it? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I understand that a good share of that land is owned by a 
 Los Angeles man, Mr. Harry Chandler. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Owned by capitalists? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. And they have the work done by Japanese largely? 
 
 Mr. BACON. That is what I understand, by Japanese and Mexicans. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Is it or is it not a fact that in the last two or three years the 
 Imperial Valley people have rented out their lands and have practically Japan- 
 esed that entire valley? 
 
 Mr. BACON. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. SWING. There has been a law against it, Judge Raker. You know that. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I was asking about the facts, irrespective of the law. 
 
 Mr. SWING. We are law-abiding citizens down there. 
 
 Mr. BACON. There is a colonization scheme starting in here [indicating] for 
 '.\-stTvice men, and I believe the only successful one in this country. Some 
 of those men went in there and started from nothing and paid for the land in 
 the last two or three years. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Went in where? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Right here, up near Brawley. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. That is the northern end of the Imperial Valley ? 
 
 Mr. BACON. That is about the center. There were some 150 men in there at 
 one time. I believe that there are 50 there now. That is a pretty good average, 
 I think, to make. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now, you have been in Imperial Valley, and you think I am safe 
 in saying that the farmers there, during the last three years have not been and 
 are not continuing there to practically leave the land and rent it to the Japanese? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Oh, no. But here is where the farmers are awfully handicapped : 
 No bank is lending money on land there on account of this flood menace. The 
 Federal farm loan bank has refused to make, loans. They say that this danger 
 is so great that they do not consider they are justified in making loans on that 
 property. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So that handicaps you? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Very much. They are working under an awful handicap. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Are we to understand that by reason of this menace of the inflow 
 of the Colorado River the farm loan banks decline to loan money to these farm- 
 ers in the valley? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How long has that been the case? 
 
 Mr. BACON. That was brought out at the hearing held before this committee 
 about two years ago. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. It was brought out then, but how long has it been the case? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I know it has been the case for two years ; how much longer I 
 do not know. 
 
 Mr. RAKEB. That would practically apply to private individuals loaning on 
 ranches, too. would it not? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes ; of course, when a bank refuses to loan, the private individual 
 with little capital does not consider he is safe in loaning. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So you are handicapped in getting money enough to keep im- 
 provements going, and you are handicapped with this danger always before you 
 that this might destroy all you have? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Yes, sir ; they are handicapped decidedly. Here is another pe- 
 culiar phase of the situation : You have down here in Mexico land colonized 
 by Japanese 
 
 Mr. RAKER (interposing). Where? 
 
 Mr. BACON. Below the line in Mexico. You have this area in here in Cali- 
 fornia [indicating] populated by the American farmer. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That is in California? 
 
 Mr. BACON. In California. Now the California American citizens are being 
 assessed to-day about half a million dollars a year through their irrigation 
 project. This money is sent down into Mexico and spent on levees which protect 
 this Mexican land that is raising produce to compete with the American farmer 
 on the American side of the line. You are penalizing the American farmer about 
 $500,000 a year, which helps out this man in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then in addition to that, on the Mexican side just below Mexicali, 
 you maintain a Monte Carlo to take the rest of his money. 
 
 Mr. BACON. I would not say that was maintained for the American farmer.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWEE COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 81 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I did not say the American farmer; I said there is maintained. 
 
 Mr. BACON. There is, I believe. I am not advised on that. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. I did not make such an assertation as to the American farmer. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. I understood your question to Mayor Bacon to be that " you 
 maintained "? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Did I say "you"? I should have said "There is maintained." 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Where is the produce that is raised in Mexican territory 
 marketed ? 
 
 Mr. BACON. In the United States largely. I would not be surprised- if some of 
 the cantaloupes that you have been eating here in the last week have come 
 from Mexican territory. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Does the emergency tariff now in force have any effect 
 upon that? 
 
 Mr. BACON. I do not know. It certainly is not prohibitive, because I know I 
 have seen great quantities of Mexican produce coming into American territory, 
 and they evidently can stand the tariff and still sell their goods in this 
 country. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Are there any more questions to ask of Mr. Bacon? 
 
 Mr. BARBOTTR. I was just going to ask unanimous consent, or to suggest, that 
 the resolutions that Mayor Bacon has be incorporated in the record. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. If there is no objection, that will be done. 
 
 (The papers referred to follow:) 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C., June 22, 1922. 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF PUBLIC LANDS, 
 
 House of Representatives. 
 
 GENTLEMEN : In submitting the accompanying resolutions of various munici- 
 pal, civic, and other organizations for your information, it would seem to be 
 appropriate for me as president of the League of Southern California Munici- 
 palities and chairman of called conventions of this and associated organizations 
 to acquaint you with what I believe to be the unanimous sentiment of the people 
 in southern California regarding the present bill known as H. R. 11449. together 
 with a brief historical survey of the public movements leading up to such 
 conclusions. 
 
 HISTORICAL. 
 
 Immediately after the publication of the Preliminary Report on the Problems 
 of the Imperial Valley and Vicinity, the Director of the Reclamation Service, 
 as required by act of Congress approved May 18. 1920. entitled. "An act to 
 provide for the examination and report on conditions and possibilities of irri- 
 gation development of the Imperial Valley in California." attention of the people 
 of southern California became riveted upon the possibilities of a practical 
 solution of the problem of the flood peril, which threatens the complete and 
 permanent destruction of a large section of this State. 
 
 The pressing necessity for additional electric power resources for the use 
 of the Southwest by reason of its industrial, commercial, and agricultural 
 growth immediately suggested to the people of southern California a possibility 
 of practical financial cooperation on its part with other public agencies, such as 
 a Federal Government and the States of Arizona and Nevada, in arriving at a 
 solution of a problem otherwise locally impossible and nationally difficult of 
 accomplishment. 
 
 Somewhat spontaneously, therefore, a convention of the cities and districts 
 of southern California was held at Pasadena, Calif., on July 22, 1921. This 
 first meeting effected a permanent organization, known as the League of 
 Southern California Municipalities. Members in attendance, representatives 
 of all of the larger and most of the smaller communities, thereupon adopted 
 resolutions urging action by Congress and the Federal Power Commission which 
 would exclude private interests in the development of Boulder Canyon project 
 and permit its immediate construction and control by the Federal Government. 
 
 Other conventions were subsequently held, namely, at Ontario, Alhambra. 
 and Santa Ana, and delegations presented the collective sentiment of the people 
 of southern California to the convention of the League of the Southwest at 
 Riverside and the official hearing called at San Diego by the honorable Secre- 
 tary of the Interior. A. B. Fall. December last. 
 
 Official representatives were present at Phoenix, Ariz., in March on the oc- 
 casion of the hearing of the Colorado River Commission, Secretary of Com- 
 merce, Hon. Herbert Hoover presiding.
 
 82 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 On no occasion has there been anything hut a unanimous and insistent demand 
 for the principles expressed in H. K. 11449, bill now before the Committee on 
 Irrigation of Arid Lands. 
 
 H. K. 11449 INDORSED. 
 
 After the introduction of the bill providing for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River Basin (H. R. 11449) a meeting of the League 
 of Southern California Municipalities, in conjunction with irrigation and farm 
 districts, was called by its president, John L. Bacon, mayor of Santa Diego, to 
 consider the measure. At this meeting held at Santa Ana. Calif., on May 4, 
 1922, the aforesaid bill was carefully considered and unanimously indorsed by 
 resolution attached hereto. A committee was appointed to take proper steps 
 to apprise Congress of the sentiment in southern California in way of its 
 speedy passage. 
 
 Subsequently a large number of cities, districts, and other bodies indorsed 
 this or passed appropriate resolutions, a number of which are likewise attached. 
 
 STATEMENT OF LEAGUE OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA MUNICIPALITIES. 
 
 Southern California, as represented by this organization, now desires to make 
 the following statement of its position and understanding of H. R. 11449, 
 authorizing the construction of the Boulder Canyon project. 
 
 We understand that it is proposed that the Federal Government construct a 
 dam on the lower reaches of the Colorado River, in Boulder Canyon, and 
 develop, regulate, and control the flow of the river and prevent disastrous flood 
 conditions as a part of the project. 
 
 It is proposed to construct certain irrigation canals which will permit of 
 the irrigation of large tracts of arid land as an incident to the construction of 
 the dam. There will be created power rights. The cost of the dam project 
 will be charged against these power rights which are to be fairly allocated to 
 the States and districts. 
 
 The cost of irrigation canals and works is to be charged against the land 
 to be brought under irrigation. 
 
 COLORADO RIVER LONG A PROBLEM. 
 
 The Colorado River, with its tremendous watershed, has long been a terri- 
 fying agent of destruction. The melting snow from the mountains through 
 which it runs creates flood conditions of unmanageable proportions. At the 
 same time its great flow of water and its rapid fall makes it a great poten- 
 tiality for irrigation and power development. 
 
 Being an interstate and international stream, no State and no private in- 
 terest can be in a position either to control its floods or utilize its power and 
 irrigation. 
 
 It presents, therefore, a national problem solvable only by Federal initiative. 
 
 WHY SOLUTION IS NOW POSSIBLE. 
 
 Two circumstances have brought the matter of control and usage of the 
 Colorado River to the front for action, and likewise permits a practical so- 
 lution. 
 
 The gradual deposit of silt along the lower reaches of the river continuing 
 through years has served to increase the flood menace. If, while in flood, the 
 river breaks its banks, the entire Imperial Valley, which is below sea level, 
 will be flooded and destroyed. When the waters once find their way into the 
 valley nothing but the evaporation by the heat of the sun through centuries 
 of time can remove the water. While the Imperial Valley and various interests 
 there have done everything in their power against floods, such measures are 
 only temporary and may fail and result in disaster to Imperial Valley any 
 year. The only thing we can do for this territory is the control of the flow of 
 the river by storage, and this is possible only by Federal action. 
 
 While this Hood peril has been thus growing more acute, the Southwest has 
 been rapidly increasing in population and its resources commercial, industrial, 
 and agricultural. The demand for power exceeds the available supply. Thus 
 there has been created a market for the power which will be produced by a 
 dam at Boulder Canyon, so that the financing of the project can be made- 
 feasible.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 83 
 
 In brief, the Imperial Valley needs protection from floods. The territory 
 around the lower reaches of the Colorado River needs the power which will 
 be created by the agencies which protect the valley from flood. 
 
 Furthermore, as an incident to the protection of the Imperial Valley from 
 Hood, water will be available for irrigation, and it will be possible to open 
 thousands of acres of the public domain which are now arid and useless. H. R. 
 11449 gives to the ex-service men preferential right to this land. 
 
 PLAN CAREFULLY WORKED OUT. 
 
 Southern California appreciates that the plan of the Boulder Canyon project, 
 as expressed in concrete form in the bill now before Congress, has been 
 worked out by the Secretary of the Interior and the Reclamation Service after 
 extensive investigation and as a result of many years and long discussions ; 
 that it is a carefully balanced scheme ; that its consummation will not affect 
 the rights or claims of those interested in the upper reaches of the river ; that the 
 project will, within a reasonable time, finance itself; that the plan recognizes 
 in a fair and reasonable way the powerful sentiment in the Nation against per- 
 mitting this, perhaps the Nation's greatest resource in hydroelectric power, to 
 pass into private hands ; that public agencies are given a preferential right to 
 the power to be developed ; and that any power passing into private hands is 
 subject to recapture within a reasonable time, the latter two provisions being 
 an established national policy written into the Federal water power act. 
 
 STRONG SUPPORT TO PROJECT. 
 
 Southern California believes that so carefully has the honorable Secretary of 
 the Interior and the Reclamation Service worked out its plan for this project, 
 and so accurately has the public sentiment been gauged, that there is a feeling 
 that the plan is sound in all its fundamental features. City after city in the 
 Southwest as well as large agricultural organizations have indorsed it. Cham- 
 bers of commerce and other civic bodies have expressed their approval. At least, 
 as far as southern California is concerned, sentiment is unanimous. 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 JOHN L. BACON, 
 Mayor San Diego, Calif., 
 President League Southern California Municipalities. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 27690. 
 
 Be it resolved. By the common council of the city of San Diego, Calif., as 
 follows : That the following resolution adopted at Santa Ana, Calif., May 4, 
 1922, at a called convention of representatives of the southern section of the 
 League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus and farm centers of 
 southern California and of the Imperial irrigation districts, be, and the same 
 is hereby, adopted as an expression of opinion of the common council of said 
 city : 
 
 " Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 gr^it Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River; that the menace of this river 
 is increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a 
 year ; that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke 
 into the valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees 
 must be built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee construc- 
 tion is very poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River 
 break through the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable ; and 
 that the havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling, because it would not 
 only be immediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent for 
 the reason that its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most 
 everywhere else, but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below 
 sea level, as in the formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river 
 again turns to another outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts 
 these waters by evaporation ; and 
 
 " Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this
 
 84 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed; and 
 
 " Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, ' To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin,' introduced in 
 the House- of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate 
 by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplish- 
 ment of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now, therefore, 
 be it 
 
 "Resolved, By the joint convention of the representatives of the southern sec- 
 tion of the League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus and farm 
 centers of southern California and of the Imperial irrigation districts, duly 
 assembled in the city of Santa Ana, Calif., on Thursday, the 4th day of May, 
 1922, pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given, that House of 
 Representatives bill No. 11449, ' To provide for the protection and development 
 of the lower Colorado River Basin,' be approved and indorsed ; that we urge 
 upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the Congress the 
 imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill, that the relief 
 therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Senators and Con- 
 gressmen from California to give their special attention to this measure and 
 press its adoption." 
 
 And be it further resolved, That this common council urges that all possible 
 means be taken to expedite the passage of the bill mentioned in the above 
 resolution ; and 
 
 Be it further resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded by the 
 city clerk to each of the Representatives and Senators from the State of 
 California. 
 
 I hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a full, true, and correct 
 copy of resolution No. 27690 of the common council of the city of San Diego, 
 as adopted by said council May 15, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] ALLEN H. WRIGHT, 
 
 City Clerk of the City of San Diego, Calif. 
 
 Los ANGELES, CALIF., June 7, 1922. 
 R. L. CBISWKLL. 
 
 Hotel Raleigh. Washington, D. C.: 
 
 At a meeting of the city council held this day the following resolution was 
 adopted : 
 
 " Be it resolved, That the council of the city of Los Angeles strongly urges 
 the passage of the companion bills pending in Congress, being Senate bill 3511 
 and House bill 11449, providing for the construction of the Boulder Canyon 
 project on the Colorado River and of the all-American canal, connecting Im- 
 perial and Coachella Valleys with Laguna Dam ; that the council regards these 
 great projects as of vital importance to the welfare and development of the 
 whole Southwest, and requests the Senators and Representatives from Califor- 
 nia in the National Congress to employ their utmost efforts to bring about the 
 adoption of such legislation ; that certified copies of this resolution be trans- 
 mitted to Secretary Fall and Secretary Hoover and to our Senators and Mem- 
 bers of Congress." 
 
 ROBERT DOMINGXJEZ, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea; that its levees must be 
 built higher each year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 very poor material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable: and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be grent and appalling because it would not only be 
 immediately destructive, but its evil effects would be permanent for the reason
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 85 
 
 that its; waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evapora- 
 tion ; and, 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 
 50,000 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property 
 in th's valley can be nvade safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the 
 river basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be 
 irrigated, and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed; and, 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin." introduced in the 
 House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner: Now. therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved. By the joint convention of the representatives of the southern 
 section of the League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus and 
 farm centers of southern California, and of the Imperial irrigation districts, 
 duly assembled in the city of Santa Ana, Calif., on Thursday, the 4th day of 
 May, 1922, pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given. That House of 
 Representatives bill No. 11449. " To provide for the protection and development 
 of the lower Colorado River Basin," be approved and indorsed ; that we urge 
 upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the Congress the 
 imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill that the relief 
 therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Senators and Con- 
 gressmen from California to give their special attention to this measure and 
 press its adoption. 
 
 Respectfully sumbitted. 
 
 GEORGE L. HOODENPYL, 
 J. S. NICKERSON, 
 GBANT M. LORRAINE, 
 
 Committee. 
 
 I. Grant M. Lorraine, secretary of the joint convention of the representatives 
 of the southern section of the League of California Municipalities, of the farm 
 bureaus and farm centers of southern California, and of the Imperial irrigation 
 d stricts. do hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was unanimously 
 adopted by said joint convention on the 4th day of May, 1922, in Santa Ana, 
 Calif., as appears in the minutes of said meeting. 
 Dated, Alhambra, Calif., May 20, 1922. 
 
 GRANT M. LORRAINK. 
 
 Secretary. 
 
 RESOLUTION. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is in- 
 creasing with the years; that its bed is tilling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea; that its levees must be 
 built higher each year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 very poor material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be immeasureable: and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling because it would not only be 
 immediately destructive, but its evil effects would lie permanent for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off or subside. as in flood most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the r ; ver again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evapora- 
 tion ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin ; and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated, 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and
 
 86 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Wliereas House of Representatives bill No. 1149, " To provide for the protec- 
 tion and development of the lower Colorado River basin,' 1 introduced in the 
 House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner; now, therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, By the joint convention of the representatives of the southern 
 section of the League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus and 
 farm centers of the southern California and of the Imperial irrigation districts, 
 duly assembled, in the city of Santa Ana, Calif., on Thursday, the 4th day of 
 May, 1922, pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given; that House 
 of Representatives bill No. 1149, " To provide for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River basin," be approved and indorsed ; that we 
 urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the'Congress 
 the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill that the 
 relief proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Senators and Congress- 
 men from California to give their special attention to this measure and press 
 its adoption. 
 
 I, Otto H. Duelke, city clerk of the city of Inglewood, Calif., do hereliy certify 
 that the foregoing resolution was unanimously adopted by the board of trustees 
 of the city of Inglewood. Calif., on the 22d day of May, 1922, as appears in the 
 minutes of said meeting. 
 
 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of the city of 
 Inglewood, Calif., this 24th day of May, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] OTTO H. DUELKE. 
 
 City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CITY OF ORANGE, CALIF., 
 
 MAY 19, 1922. 
 
 Whereas to all persons acquainted with the facts that the great Imperial 
 Valley in California is anually in imminent danger of being overflowed and 
 flooded by the Colorado River; that the menace of this river is increasing with 
 the years ; that its bed is filling and rising each year ; that its bottom is now 
 several feet higher than it was when it broke into the valley several years ago 
 and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be built higher each year ; that 
 the only available dirt for levee construction is very poor material for that 
 purpose ; that should the Colorado River break through the levees again its 
 destruction would be immeasurable ; and that the havoc of its deluge would 
 be great and appalling, because it would not only be immediately destructive 
 but its evil effects would be permanent, for the reason that its waters would 
 not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, but would gather in the 
 basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the formation of the Salton 
 Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another outlet and until the 
 sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evaporation ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protec- 
 tion and development of the lower Colorado River Basin." introduced in the 
 Senate by Senator Hiram W. Johnson and in the House of Representatives by 
 Congressman Phil D. Swing, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now. therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, by the board of trustees of the city of Orange, assembled this 19th 
 day of May in regular adjourned session in the city of Orange, Calif., that 
 the House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protection 
 and development of the lower Colorado River basin." be approved and in- 
 dorsed : that we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and 
 upon the Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of 
 this bill, that the relief therein imposed may soon be given ; that we request the 
 Senators and Congressmen from California to give their special attention to 
 this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Introduced and adopted by the board of trustees of the city of Orange, May 
 19, 1922. 
 
 O. E. GUNTHER. 
 
 Preident of the Board of Trustees of the City of Orange.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER EASIEST. 87 
 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- 
 duced and passed by the board of trustees of the city of Orange at a regular 
 adjourned meeting of .said board, held on the 19th day of May, 1922, by the 
 following vote : Ayes. Trustees Ainsworth, Walton, Heniphill, Whit sell, and 
 President Gunther : noes, trustees, jione ; absent, none. 
 
 W. O. WHITE, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOAKD OF TIJVSTEES OF THE CITY OF UPLAND, CALIF., 
 AT A SPECIAL CALLED MEETING, MAY 19. 1922. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and flooded by the Colorado River; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it wns when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be 
 l>uilt higher each year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 \(>ry pror material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling because it would not only 
 be immediately destructive but its evil effect would be permanent for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off cr subside, as in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in 
 the formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to an- 
 other outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by 
 evaporation ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50.000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flcod-control dams in the river 
 basin and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in 
 the House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate 
 by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplish- 
 ment of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now, there- 
 fore, be it 
 
 Resolved, By the board of trustees of the city of Upland, at a special meeting 
 held in the council chamber of the city of Upland, on Friday the 19th day of 
 May, 1922, at 7.30 p. m., pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given, 
 that the House of Representatives bill No. 11449 " To provide for the protection 
 and development of the lower Colorado River Basin." be approved and indorsed. 
 
 That we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Land and upon 
 the Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this 
 bill that the relief therein proposed may soon be given. 
 
 That we request the Senators and Congressmen from California to give 
 their special attention to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Approved. 
 
 F. C. BUFFINGTON, 
 
 President of the Board of Trustees, City of Upland. 
 Attest : 
 
 E. C. MEHL, City Clerk. 
 
 I, E. C. Mehl, city clerk of the city of Upland, do hereby certify that the fore- 
 going resolution was unanimously adopted by the board of trustees of the city 
 of Upland, at a special called meeting held on the 19th day of May, 1922, as 
 appears in the minutes of said meeting. 
 
 E. C. MEHL, City Clerk. 
 
 May 20, 1922. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 1262. 
 
 Resolved, By the mayor and common council of the city of San Bernardino, 
 Calif., in regular session duly assembled on the 22d day of May, 1922, that we 
 unqualifiedly indorse House Bill No. 1149. now pending in Congress, providing 
 for the protection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin, and 
 urge that Congress pass said measure at as early a date as possible in order 
 
 131& 22 PT 3 2
 
 88 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 that steps may be taken to protect the vast property interests endangered by 
 the Colorado River ; and 
 
 Be it further resolved, That a certified copy of this resolution ' be sent to G. 
 M. Lorraine, secretary southern section League of California Municipalities, 
 and also to Herbert Hoover, Secretary of the Interior, Washington, D. C. 
 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the mayor 
 and common council of the city of San Bernardino at its regular meeting thereof 
 held on the 22d day of May, 1922, by the following vote, to wit : 
 
 Ayes : Pittman, Rogers, Rouse, Stromee, Adkins. 
 
 Noes : None. 
 
 Absent: None. 
 
 [SEAL.] J. A. OSBORN, City Clerk. 
 
 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 
 
 County of San Bernardino, City of San Bernardino, ss: 
 
 I, J. H. Osborn, city clerk of the city of San Bernardino, do hereby certify 
 that the foregoing resolution is a true and correct copy of resolution No. 1262, 
 as appears on the records in my office. 
 
 [SEAL.] J. H. OSBORN, 
 
 City Clerk City of San Bernardino. 
 
 RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES or THE CITY OF SAN FERNANDO, 
 MAY 22, 1922, RELATIVE TO THE CONTROL OF THE COLORADO RIVER. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years ; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year ; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be 
 built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee construction is very 
 poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River break through 
 the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable ; and that the havoc 
 of its deluge would be great and appaling because it would not only be im- 
 mediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent for the reason that 
 its waters would not run off or subside as in floods most everywhere else but 
 would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the forma- 
 tion of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another outlet 
 and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evaporation; 
 and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this valley 
 can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river basin, 
 and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated and im- 
 mense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protec- 
 tion and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in the 
 House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now, therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, By the board of trustees of the city of San Fernando, that House 
 of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River Basin," be approved and indorsed. 
 
 That we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the 
 Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill 
 that the relief therein proposed may soon be given. 
 
 That we request the Senators and Congressmen from California to give their 
 special attention to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 F. D. PARKER, 
 President Board of Trustees City of San Fernando. 
 
 I, H. C. Caldwell, city clerk of the city of San Fernando do hereby certify 
 that the foregoing resolution was unanimously adopted on the 22d day of May, * 
 1922, by the board of trustees of the city of San Fernando. 
 
 H. C. CALDWELL, 
 
 City Clerk of the City of San Fernando. 
 SAN FERNANDO, CALIF., May 22, 1922.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 89 
 
 i 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 274, BY THE BOARD or TRUSTEES OF THE CITY OF FULLERTON, 
 URGING THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVEK 
 BASIN. 
 
 The board of trustees of the city of Fullerton do resolve as follows : 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is in- 
 creasing with the years; that its bed is tilling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be built 
 higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee construction is very 
 poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River break through 
 the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable and that the havoc of 
 its deluge would be great and appalling, because it would not only be imme- 
 diately destructive, but its evil effects would be permanent, for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evapora- 
 tion ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this valley 
 can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river basin 
 and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated and 
 immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protection 
 and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in the House 
 of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by Senator 
 Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment of these 
 purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now, therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, by the board of trustees of the city of Fullerton, Calif., that House 
 of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River Basin," be approved and indorsed. 
 
 That we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the 
 Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill, 
 that the relief therein proposed may soon be given. 
 
 That we request the Senators and Congressmen from California to give their 
 special attention to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly intro- 
 duced and adopted by the board of trustees of the city of Fullerton at its regular 
 meeting held on the 16th day of May, 1922, by the following vote : 
 
 Ayes : Drake, Marsden, Davis, and Coulter. 
 
 Noes: None. 
 
 Absent : Moore. 
 
 Attest : F. C. HEZMALHALCH, 
 
 [SEAL.] City Clerk of the City of Fullerton. 
 
 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this 16th day of May, 1922. 
 
 W. F. COULTER, 
 President of the Board of Trustees of the City of Fullerton. 
 
 I, F. C. Hezmalhalch, city clerk of the city of Fullerton, do hereby certify 
 that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of the resolution introduced 
 and passed by the board of trustees of the city of Fulfterton on the 16th day of 
 May. 1022. and approved by the chairman of the board of trustees on the 16th 
 day of May, 1922, the original of which is on file in my office. 
 
 in witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal 
 this 22d day of May, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] F. C. HEZMALHALCH, 
 
 City Cleric of the City of Fullerton. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 13-TKV-N. S., TNHOIJSINI; HOCSE OF REPRKSKNTATIVKS BILL No. 
 
 11440. "To PROVIDE KOK THK PROTECTION AM) I M VKI.OI'.M KNT OF THE LOWER 
 ('(II OKADO KlVKK." 
 
 W]*>rcas it is apparent <"<> a11 persons acquainted with th<- facts that the great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and tlooded by the Colorado River; that the menace' of this river is
 
 90 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOKADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it \vas when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea: that its levees must be 
 built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 very poor material for the purpose; that should the r<il<>rado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be imineasureable and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling, because it would not only 
 be immediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent for the 
 reason that its waters wou'.d not run off or subside, as in Hoods most everywhere 
 else, but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as 
 in the formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to 
 another outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by 
 evaporation ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin and the hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irri- 
 gated and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in 
 the House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate 
 by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner: Now. therefore be it 
 
 Resolved, By the joint convention of the representatives of the southern 
 section of the League of California Municipalities of the Farm Bureaus and 
 Farm Centers of Southern California, and of the Imperial irrigation districts, 
 duly assembled in the city of Santa Anna. Calif., on Thursday, the 4th day of 
 May, 1922, pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given, that House 
 of Representatives bill No. 11449, *' To provide for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River Basin." be approved and indorsed. 
 
 That we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the 
 Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill 
 that the relief therein proposed may soon be given. 
 
 That we request the Senators and Congressmen from California to give 
 their special attention to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Adopted by the council of the city of Berkeley by the following vote : 
 Ayes : Councilmen Bartlett, Harms, Hey wood, Schmidt, and President Bartlett. 
 Noes : None. 
 Absent : None. 
 
 Louis BARTLETT, 
 
 Mayor and President of the Council. 
 Attest : 
 
 E. M. HANN, 
 
 City. Clerk and Clerk of the Council. 
 Per F. E. TURNER, Deputy. 
 MAY 19, 1922. 
 
 RESOLUTION. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded bj; the Colorado River; that the menace of this river 
 is increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a 
 year; that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke 
 into the valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees 
 must be built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levy construc- 
 tion is very poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River 
 break through the levees again, its destruction would be immeasurable; and 
 that the havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling, because it would 
 not only be immediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent 
 for the reason that its waters would not run off or subside as in floods most 
 everywhere else but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below 
 sea level, as in the formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river 
 again turns to another outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts 
 their waters by evaporation ; and
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 91 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50.000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can he made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, "To provide for the protec- 
 tion and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in the 
 House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner: Now. therefore, he it 
 
 Reftolrcd. By the city council of the city of Long Beach, Calif., in regular 
 session held on Tuesday, the 9th day of May, 1922, that House of Representa- 
 tives bill No. 11449. " To provide for the protection and development of the 
 lower Colorado River Basin." be approved and indorsed. 
 
 That we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the 
 Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill 
 that the relief therein proposed may soon be given. 
 
 That we request the Senators and Congressmen from California to give 
 their special attention to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 I, H. C. Waughop, city clerk of the city of Long Beach, Calif., do hereby 
 certify that the foregoing resolution was unanimously adopted by the city 
 council of the city of Long Beach on the 9th day of May, 1922, as appears in 
 the minutes of said meeting, by the following vote: 
 * Ayes : Condit, Downs, Pillsbury, Workman, Beck. 
 
 Noes : None. 
 
 Absent : Welch. Buffum. 
 
 LONG BEACH, CALIF., May 9, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] H. C. WAUGHOP, City Clerk. 
 
 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 
 
 County of Los Angeles, City of Long Beach, ss: 
 
 ' I, H. C. Waughop. city clerk of the city of Long Beach, do hereby certify 
 that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution that was adopted 
 by the city council of the city of Long Beach, Tuesday, May 9, 1922, as ap- 
 pears of record in my office. 
 
 [SEAL.] H. C. WAUGHOP, 
 
 City Clerk of the City of Long Beach. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 910. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea; that its levees must be 
 built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 very poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again, its destruction would the immeasurable ; and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling, because it would not only be 
 immediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent, for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of the centuries again lift their waters by 
 evaporation ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this poi'tending catastrophe and the 50.000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed; and 
 
 Whereas House bill 11449, " To provide for the protection and development 
 of the Lower Colorado River Basin." introduced in the House of Representatives
 
 92 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, 
 is a measure looking to the early accomplishment of these purposes in the best 
 and most practical manner: Now, therefore, be it 
 
 Rcsolri'tl Inj the roin-inixxinn of the citi/ of Alhainbm. Calif., at their regular 
 meeting held on Monday. Mai/ 1~>. /<>..'>. That House bill 11449, " To provide for 
 the protection and development of the Lower Colorado River Basin," be approved 
 and indorsed ; that we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands 
 and upon the Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage 
 of this bill, that rhe relief therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request 
 the Senators and Congressmen from California to give their special attention 
 to this measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Signed and approved this 15th day of May, 1922. 
 
 N. W. THOMPSON, 
 
 President of the Commission of the City of Alhambra. 
 Attest: 
 
 R. B. WALLACE, 
 
 City Clerk. 
 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly passed and adopted 
 by the commission of the city of Alhambra at its regular meeting held on the 
 15th day of May, 1922. by the following votes : Ayes. Commissioners Garrison, 
 Battelle, Bailey, and Thompson ; noes, none ; absent, Commissioner Gibboney. 
 
 [SEAL.] R. B. WALLACE. 
 
 City Clerk. 
 
 I, R. B. Wallace, do hereby certify that I am the duly qualified and acting 
 city clerk of the city of Alhambra, Calif., and that the attached is a mie and 
 correct copy of resolution No. 910, which was adopted by the commission of the 
 city of Alhambra, Calif., at its regular meeting held on the loth day of 
 May, 1922. 
 
 Witness my hand and the seal of the city of Alhambra this 17th day of 
 May, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] R. B. WALLACE, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION ADOPTED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF RIVERSIDE, CALIF., 
 
 ON MAY 16, 1922. 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years; that its bed is rilling and rising about 1 foot a year; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke it into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be 
 built higher every year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is 
 very poor material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable; and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling. 1 it-cause it would not only be 
 immediately destructive but its evil effects would he permanent, for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evapora- 
 tion ; and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50.000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House bill 11449, to provide for the protection and development of 
 the lower Colorado River Basin, introduced in the House of Representatives 
 by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is 
 a measure looking to the early accomplishment of these purposes in the best and 
 most practical manner : Now, therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved, That we hereby approve and indorse House bill 11449, to provide 
 for the protection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin ; that
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN". 93 
 
 we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the Congress 
 the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill that the 
 relief therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Senators and 
 Congressmen from California to give their special attention to this measure and 
 press its adoption. 
 
 I, C. B. Burns, clerk of the city of Riverside, Calif., do hereby certify that the 
 foregoing is a true and correct copy of a resolution adopted by the mayor and 
 common council of said city of Riverside at its meeting held on the 16th day of 
 May, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] C. B. BURNS, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION INDORSING THE RESOLUTION ADOPTED AT A MEETING HELD IN SANTA 
 AXA. MAY 5, 1922, URGING THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO PASS BILL 
 No. 11449. 
 
 Whereas there is now pending in the House of Representatives of the 
 United States a bill " To provide for the protection and development of the 
 Lower Colorado River Basin," the same being No. 11449 ; and 
 
 Whereas at a public meeting of the League of California Municipalities, 
 held in Santa Ana, Calif., on the 4th day of May, 1922, a resolution was 
 adopted by said meeting urging the passage of said bill; and 
 
 .Whereas every city and property owner in southern California is vitally 
 interested therein : Now, therefore, be it 
 
 RexoU-ed by the Council of the City of Santa Barbara, That the sentiment 
 expressed in said resolution be, and the same is hereby, indorsed. 
 
 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 
 
 County of Santa Barbara, ss : 
 
 I, J. E. Sloan, mayor of the city of Santa Barbara, hereby certify that the 
 foregoing resolution was read in full at a regular meeting of the council of 
 the city of Santa Barbara, held on the 18th day of May, 1922, and was adopted 
 by the following vote on roll call : 
 
 Yeas: Councilman S. L. Buck, F. W. Cole, H. L. Hitchcock, Geo. M. Mc- 
 Guire, J. E. Sloan. 
 
 Nays : None. 
 
 Absent : None. 
 
 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the official 
 seal to be affixed this 19th day of May, 1922. 
 
 J. E. SLOAN, Mayor. 
 
 Attest : 
 
 [SEAL.] S. B. TAGGART, City Clerk. 
 
 I hereby certify the above to be a true and correct copy of the resolution 
 passed by the city of Santa Barbara at its meeting on May 18, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] S. B. TAGGART, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 4321. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY 
 OF PASADENA INDORSING HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL No. 11449, 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 Great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River: that the menace of this river 
 is increasing with the years ; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a 
 year; that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke 
 Into the valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees 
 must be built higher each year; that the only available dirt for levee construc- 
 tion is very poor material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River 
 break through the levees again its destruction would be immesasurable ; and 
 tluit the havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling because it would 
 not only be immediately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent 
 for the reason that it waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most 
 everywhere else, but would gather in the basin of the valley which is below 
 sea level, as in the formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river
 
 94 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 again turns to another outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts 
 these waters by evaporation: and 
 
 Whereas relief can he had from this portending catastrophe, and the 50,000 
 people and the m'llions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can he made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin, and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can he irrigated^ 
 and immense amounts of hyroelectric power can be developed: and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11440. "To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin." introduced in tin- 
 House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplishment 
 of these purposes in the best and most practical manner: Now, therefore, be ic 
 
 Renoir fd btt th< tionnl of directors of the city of Pasadena: 
 
 SECTION 1. That House of Representatives bill No. 11449, "To provide for 
 the protection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," be ap- 
 proved and indorsed. That the city of Pasadena urges upon the Committee 
 on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the Congress of the United States the 
 imperative necessity of an early report and passage of said bill that the relief 
 therein proposed may soon be given, and further requests and urges that the 
 Senators and Congressmen from California give their special attention to this 
 measure and press its adoption. 
 
 SEC. 2. The city clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and 
 cause copies thereof to be prepared, certified, and forwarded to Grant -M. Lor- 
 raine, secretary southern section of the League of California Municipalities for 
 transmission by him to the Members and committees of Congress herein men- 
 tioned. 
 
 I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the board of 
 directors of the city of Pasadena at its meeting held May , 1922. 
 
 Clerk of the City of Pasadena. 
 Signed and approved this - - day of May, 1922. 
 
 Chairman of the Board of Directors of the City of Pasadena, 
 
 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, County of Los Angeles, City of Pasadena, ss: 
 I, Bessie Chamberlain, clerk of the city of Pasadena, do hereby certify that 
 the attached document is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution of the 
 city of Pasadena, which same was adopted at its meeting held May 19, 1922. 
 
 In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the corporate 
 seal of the city of Pasadena this 19th day of May, 1922. 
 
 Clerk of the City of Pasadena, Calif. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 788. A RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CITY 
 OF SANTA ANA, CALIF., INDORSING AND RECOMMENDING THE PASSAGE OF BILL 
 No. 11449 Now BEFORE CONGRESS, TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION AND DE- 
 VELOPMENT OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 The board of trustees of the city of Santa Ana, Calif., resolve and declare 
 as follows : 
 
 Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river 
 is increasing with the years; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a 
 year; that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into 
 the valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must 
 be built higher each year ; that the only available dirt for levee cons ruction is 
 very poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River break 
 through the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable : and that the 
 havoc of its deluge would be great and appalling because it would not only be 
 immediately destructive, but its evil effects would be permanent for the reason 
 that its waters would no" run off or subside, as 1 in floods most everywhere else, 
 but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to another 
 outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by evapora- 
 tion; and
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 95 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-control dams in the river 
 basin and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be irrigated 
 and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin," introduced in 
 the House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate 
 by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplish- 
 ment of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now, therefore, 
 be it 
 
 Resolved, by the Board of Trustees of the City of Santa Ana, Calif., That 
 House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the protection and de- 
 velopment of the lower Colorado River basin," be approved and indorsed ; 
 that we urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the. 
 Congress the imperative necessity of an early report and passage of this bill 
 that the relief therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Sena- 
 tors and Congressmen from California to give their special attention to this 
 measure and press its adoption. 
 
 Adopted and approved this 15th day of May, 1922. 
 
 J. G. MITCHELL, 
 
 President of the Board of Trustees City of Santa Ana, Calif. 
 . Attest: 
 
 [SEAL.] E. L. VEGELY, City Clerk. 
 
 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE CITY OF SAN GABRIEL INDORSING 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES BILL No. 11449. 
 
 The Board of Trustees of the City of San Gabriel do resolve as follows : 
 
 W'hereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the Great 
 Imperial Valley in California is annually in imminent danger of being over- 
 flowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is 
 increasing with the years ; that its bed is filling and rising about 1 foot a year ; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the 
 valley several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be 
 built high each year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is very 
 poor material for the purpose; that should the Colorado River break through 
 the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable ; and that the havoc of 
 its deluge would he great and appalling, because it would be not only im- 
 mediately destructive, but its evil effects would be permanent, for the reason 
 that its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere 
 else, but would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as 
 in the formation of the Salton Sea. and remain until the river again turns to 
 another outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these w r aters by 
 evaporation : and 
 
 Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe and the 50,000 
 people and the millions of dollars worth of land and other property in this 
 valley can be made safe by the construction of flood dams in the river basin, 
 and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional land can be irrigated and 
 immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed ; and 
 
 Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449. " To provide for the pro- 
 tection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin." introduced in 
 the House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate by 
 Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early development and 
 accomplishment of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now. 
 therefore, be it 
 
 ResoJretl inj xaiil Board of Trustees of the City />f Xan Ualtrid. That House of 
 Representatives hill Xo. 11440. "To provide for the protection and development 
 of the lower Colorado River Basin," be approved and indorsed; that the city of 
 San Gabriel urges upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon 
 the Congress of the United States the imperative necessity of an early report 
 and passage of said bill that the relief therein propose.] may soon be given ; and 
 further requests and urges that the Senators and Congressmen from California 
 give their special attention to this measure and press its adoption.
 
 96 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 The city clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and cause copies 
 thereof to be prepared and forwarded to Grant M. Lorraine, secretary southern 
 section of the League of California Municipalities for transmission by him to 
 the Members and committees of Congress herein mentioned. 
 
 I, Ira H. Stouffer, city clerk of the city of San Gabriel, do hereby certify 
 that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the 
 board of trustees of the city of San Gabriel, held on the 23d day of May, 
 1922, by the following vote: 
 
 Ayes : Brownrigg, Dake, Fisk, Lettler, and Lugo. 
 Noes : None. 
 Absent : None. 
 
 IRA H. STOUFFER. 
 
 City Clerk of the city of San Gabriel. 
 Signed and approved this 23d day of May, 1922. 
 [SEAL.] GEO. D. DAKE, 
 
 President of the Board of Trustees of the city of San Gabriel. 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 327. 
 
 Whereas the President has introduced in the House of Representatives of 
 the present Congress House bill No. 11449, which said bill provides the means 
 whereby the lower basin of the Colorado River may be protected from floods 
 and additional lands further developed ; 
 
 Whereas during periods of every year the people who have, with com- 
 mendable courage and great expenditure of money, reclaimed a trackless 
 desert into one of the most productive sections of our Nation are threatened 
 with the loss of their lives and their entire investment by reason of the un- 
 controlled waters of > the Colorado River ; and 
 
 Whereas the bill above mentioned if passed will not only provide security 
 for these people, but will also reclaim hundreds of thousands of acres of addi- 
 tional lands now valuless : Now, therefore, be it 
 
 Resolved by the council of the city of Santa Monica, That the said bill be, 
 and the same is hereby, indorsed, and its passage in the House and Senate 
 and approval by the President urged, and, further, that the clerk of the city 
 of Santa Monica be authorized to communicate by wire with Hon. H. Z. 
 Osborne. our Representative in Congress, requesting that he use every en- 
 deavor to procure that result, and that a copy of this resolution be forwarded 
 to the following : Hon. Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce ; Hon. H. Z. 
 Osborne, Representative in Congress ; Committee of the House of Representa- 
 tives on Flood Control. 
 
 I, Frank A. Helton, commissioner of finance, ex officio clerk of the city of 
 Santa Monica, do hereby certify that the above is a copy of a resolution duly 
 nnd regularly adopted by the council of the city of Santa Monica at its meet- 
 ing held in said city on the 19th day of May, 1922. 
 
 F. A. HELTON, 
 Commissioner of Finance, 
 Ex-offlcio Clerk of the City of Santa Monica. 
 
 CORONADO, CALIF., July 2, 1922. 
 JOHN L. BACON, 
 
 Care Congressman Phil D. Swing, Washington, D. C.: 
 
 Coronado heartily indorses House bill No. 11449. Authorize you to represent 
 us at hearings. 
 
 W. E. HARPER, 
 President of the Board of Trustees, City of Coronado.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 97 
 
 RESOLUTION No. 27690. 
 
 Be it rctoJred lt;< the common council of the citi/ of Xan Diego, Calif., as 
 folJoirs : That the following resolution, adopted at Santa Ana, Calif., May 4, 
 1922. at a called convention of representatives of the southern section of the 
 League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus, and farm centers 
 of southern California, and of the Imperial irrigation districts, be, and the 
 same is hereby, adopted as an expression of opinion of the common council of 
 said city : 
 
 " Whereas it is apparent to all persons acquainted with the facts that the 
 great Imperial Valley of California is annually in imminent danger of being 
 overflowed and flooded by the Colorado River ; that the menace of this river is in- 
 creasing with the years : that its bed is filling and raising about 1 foot a year ; 
 that its bottom is now several feet higher than it was when it broke into the valley 
 several years ago and formed the Salton Sea ; that its levees must be built 
 higher each year; that the only available dirt for levee construction is very 
 poor material for the purpose ; that should the Colorado River break through 
 the levees again its destruction would be immeasurable ; and that the havoc 
 of its deluge would be great and appalling because it would not only be immedi- 
 ately destructive but its evil effects would be permanent for the reason that 
 its waters would not run off or subside, as in floods most everywhere else, but 
 would gather in the basin of the valley, which is below sea level, as in the 
 formation of the Salton Sea, and remain until the river again turns to an- 
 other outlet and until the sunshine of centuries again lifts these waters by 
 evaporation ; and 
 
 " Whereas relief can be had from this portending catastrophe, and the 
 50,000 people and the millions of dollars' worth of land and other property in 
 this valley can be made safe by the construction of flood-contral dams in the 
 river basin ; and hundreds of thousands of acres of additional lands can be 
 irrigated, and immense amounts of hydroelectric power can be developed; and 
 
 " Whereas House of Representatives bill No. 11449, " To provide for the 
 protection and development of the lower Colorado River Basin. " introduced in 
 the House of Representatives by Congressman Phil Swing and in the Senate 
 by Senator Hiram W. Johnson, is a measure looking to the early accomplish- 
 ment of these purposes in the best and most practical manner : Now. therefore, 
 be it 
 
 "Resolved 'by the joint convention of the representatives of the southern* 
 xcction of the League of California Municipalities, of the farm bureaus, and 
 farm centers of southern California, and of the Imperial irrigation districts, 
 dutii nxxcnibled in the city of Santa Ana, Calif., on Thursday, the .'/th day of 
 M<n/, 1922, pursuant to call and notice regularly made and given, That House 
 of Representatives bill No. 11449, ' To provide for the protection and develop- 
 ment of the lower Colorado River basin, ' be approved and indorsed ; that we 
 urge upon the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands and upon the Congress 
 the impressive necessity of an early report and passage of this bill that the 
 relief therein proposed may soon be given ; that we request the Senators and 
 Congressman from California to give their special attention to this measure 
 and press its adoption ; " and be it 
 
 Resolved, That this common council urges that all possible means 
 be taken to expedite the passage of the bill mentioned in the above resolution ; 
 and be it 
 
 Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded by the city clerk 
 to each of the Representatives and Senators from the State of California. 
 
 I hereby certify the above to be a full, true, and correct copy of Resolution 
 No. 27690 of the common council of the city of San Diego as adopted by said 
 council May 15, 1922. 
 
 [SEAL.] ALLEN H. WRIGHT, City Clerk. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I also suggest that the text of the article by Mr. Grunsky, who 
 is a very able engineer, be printed in the record, omitting the illustrations. 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is there any objection? If not, that will be done.
 
 98 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 (The paper referred to follows:) 
 
 CONTROLLING THE PRINCIPAL ARTERY OF THE SOUTHWEST STATES ONE OF THE 
 FOREMOST AUTHORITIES ON THE COLORADO RIVER DISCUSSES THE SITUATION 
 Xow BEFORE THE COLORADO RIVER COMMISSION IN THE LIGHT OF THE FUTURE 
 INDUSTRIAL AND AGRICULTURAL POSSIBILITIES OF THE SOUTHWEST. 
 
 [By C. E. Grunsky, Consulting Engineer.] 
 
 The Boulder Canyon dam site is located just above the point where the Colo- 
 rado River makes its abrupt turn from a westerly to a southerly course. It 
 is some 60 miles in an air line above the point where California's east boundary 
 line strikes the river and is between three and four miles below the mouth of 
 the Virgin River. The river at this point forms the boundary between Nevada 
 on the north and Arizona on the south. The canyon is narrow, being gen- 
 erally reported as about 250 feet wide for a distance of one-half mile. The 
 sides of the gorge are steep. The rock is granite. The project for storage at 
 this site as now favored by the United States Reclamation Service involves the 
 construction of a dam that would rise to a height of 550 feet above the water 
 surface of the river, forming a reservoir with a storage capacity in excess of 
 25,000,000 acre-feet. The discharge of Colorado River at this 'point may be 
 noted, in approximate figures, as ranging from 7,000,000 to 22.000.000 acre-feet 
 per year. The normal annual discharge of the river is about 15.000,000 acre- 
 feet. The water of a full reservoir would extend up the Colorado River into 
 the lower end of the Grand Canyon. A large portion of the storage space would 
 be afforded by the lower valley of the Virgin River. The surface area of the 
 reservoir may reach 125,000 acres from which the loss by evaporation would be 
 about 750,000 acre-feet per annum. 
 
 The feasibility of a dam of the dimensions proposed seems now to be gener- 
 ally accepted by the engineers who have investigated the dam site. A reser- 
 voir at this point would control the flow of the Colorado except the contribu- 
 tions by the Gila River, and could be so manipulated that it would eliminate 
 the lower river flood menace to the extent that it is due to up river high stages. 
 It would regulate the flow of the river for irrigation purposes and would permit 
 the generation of about 600,000 horsepower. The power thus generated would 
 be available for use at points as far removed as San Francisco, but the princi- 
 pal place of use would naturally be in Arizona, Nevada, southern Utah, and 
 southern portions of California. 
 
 The up-river use of water for irrigation is increasing. Some small diversions 
 of water from the headwaters of the Colorado River into adjacent drainage 
 basins are already accomplished and others are under contemplation. It is- 
 not now known to what extent this up-river use of water will decrease the 
 discharge of the river through the Boulder Canyon and there 1s consequently 
 some conjecture as to whether the above indicated power output can be real- 
 ized. In any event there will always be a sufficient flow to make storage worth 
 while, and the natural flow alone to which unassailable down-river rights have 
 already been established by beneficial use would justify the use of the water 
 in generating power if a dam of any consderable height is placed in Boulder 
 Canyon. It may be noted in this connection that the Tuma project will require 
 a summer flow of 1,500 to 1.700 second-feet and has been actually using 1.100 
 to 1,200 second-feet. Imperial irrigation district for use on the lands of the 
 district and on a smaller area in Mexico has been diverting and using over 
 6,000 second-feet in summer and more than one-third of this amount at times 
 of minimum demand in winter. So, too, at Palo Verde there has been diversion 
 and use on a large scale. Plans for extension of irrigation in the lower river 
 regions have been made, notably in the case of Imperial Valley, where it is 
 proposed to add some 400,000 acres to the irrigated area. But any such ex- 
 tension of irrigated areas is conditioned on conserving the present wastage of 
 flood waters. This wastage is large, as will be seen, when the volume of flow 
 reaching Laguna Dam. about 16,000,000 acre-feet per year, is compared with 
 the amount diverted by Yurna reclamation project and the Imperial irrigation 
 district together, about 2,500,000 acre-feet. 
 
 ANOTHER COLORADO FLOOD IMMINENT. ^r 
 
 There is another urgent reason, aside from extension of irrigated areas and 
 power development, for the early construction of a big regulating reservoir 
 somewhere not too far up on the Colorado. This is the control of floods. The
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 99 
 
 floods on the lower river have become a serious menace to the river's delta lands. 
 Adequate storage facilities on the river under proper control would reduce 
 the peak of all flood discharges, except only those which originate in the water- 
 shed of the Gila River. It should be noted, however, in this connection that 
 such storage alone will not completely solve the flood-control problem. Colo- 
 | rndo River is now running wild in that portion of its delta which lies to the 
 r southward of a line about 20 miles south of and roughly parallel with the 
 south boundary of California. Ever since the river abandoned its channel 
 at a point near the south line of Arizona in 1909 it has been flowing westerly 
 from that point and has piled its drift and silt into the Volcano Lake region. 
 The lake has been practically obliterated by silt deposits. In consequence of 
 the increasing obstruction thus placed in the way of flood water the flood plane 
 is rising at the rate of about 1 foot a year, and has now progressed to the 
 point where the river at its high stages will begin again to overtop its natural 
 banks in the 20-mile stretch in which the river forms the boundary between 
 Arizona and Mexico, and its high waters may become a menace to levees whose 
 bases have been barely lapped with water for some years past. This situation 
 demands action which should not he delayed. The United States should take 
 whatever measures are necessary to secure the right from Mexico to put the 
 Colorado River back upon a direct course to the Gulf of California, and this 
 should be done at once, regardless of whether storage works are constructed 
 or not. 
 
 ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTY MILLION TONS OF SILT. 
 
 The silt carried by the river is a factor to be considered in the planning 
 of storage facilities. The river carries in suspension annually about 180,000,000 
 ton* of silt and rolls some more along its bottom. An average of over 100.000 
 acre-feet of well compacted sediment are brought down to the river delta 
 annually. Perhaps 80.000 to 90,000 acre-feet of deposit in a reservoir at 
 Boulder Canyon should, therefore, be expected. This would, of course, ac- 
 cumulate in the upstream portions of any reservoir that is at the points where 
 the water loses its silt-transporting power. If the Boulder Canyon project is 
 carried out, it would take the silt about 30 years to destroy one-tenth of the 
 proposed storage capacity, consequently deterioration due to the accumulation 
 of silt in the reservoir is not a serious problem from an economic standpoint. 
 
 THE ADVANTAGES OF AN UPPER DAM. 
 
 As an alternative to the early construction of the Boulder Canyon project 
 a reservoir farther upstream above Lee's Ferry in Glen Canyon has been 
 suggested. Here, too, there is a narrow canyon, but the walls are sandstone 
 instead of granite. A loose rock dam with an effective height of over 700 feet 
 and a storage capacity of over 40,000,000 acre-feet has been suggested for this 
 site. A reservoir at the Glen Canyon site would be less effective in controlling 
 floods, being some 300 miles farther upstream, and it would he farther removed 
 from the power market. But a dam at this point would have the particular 
 advantage of so checking and regulating the major portion of the river flow 
 f hat the cor.strucricn of other dams farther downstream would be facilitated. 
 Its construction, although perhaps not to the extreme height suggested, would 
 be in line with the ultimate maximum utilization of the river flow, because 
 if used in conjunction with a high dam at some down-river point the water from 
 tin's upper storage could be liberated at rates adjusted to power requirements 
 without regard to irrigation demands, and the regulation for irrigation would 
 be effected entirely at the downstream reservoir. 
 
 WATER ENOUGH FOR ALL. 
 
 There are one or two facts which stand out prominently, as, for example, the 
 apparently slight effect of the increase of the use of water at up-river points 
 upon the amount of water which reaches the Laguna Dam, near Yuma. The 
 records of discharge lack the accuracy and fail to go back far enough to make 
 the effect of up-river irrigation of about 1.150,000 acres upon this flow apparent. 
 To what extent, then, will the addition of perhaps 1,600,000 acres more to this 
 irrigated area reduce the flow? Of the 3,000,000 acre-feet of water required 
 for this area a part only, say 2.000,000 acre-feet, should be subtracted from the 
 down-river discharge. Assuming the minimum yearly supply at Boulder Can- 
 yon to be 7,000,000 acre-feet under present conditions and the normal about
 
 100 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 13,000,000 acre-feet, then, without restricting the use of Colorado River water 
 for irrigation in Wyoming, Colorado. Utah, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada, 
 there will still be 3,000,000 to 9,000,000 acre-feet of water per annum that will 
 go to waste after supplying the present needs of lower-river irrigators who 
 now have some 700,000 acres in cultivation. 
 
 Storage on a large scale is essential to reduce this waste and to make some 
 of the water of the years of larger flow available in the years of light run-off; 
 but in analyzing the effectiveness of a reservoir for this purpose it must be 
 remembered that if the water released from storage is to serve both for the 
 generation of power and for irrigation, the head at the dam should never be 
 completely sacrificed, and that, therefore, the effective reservoir capacity should 
 be entered into a calculation at much less than the full capacities as above 
 noted. 
 
 The cost of providing a reservoir at the Boulder Canyon site is generally 
 given at upward of $30,000,000. 
 
 WHO SHOULD BUILD THE DAM? 
 
 The agency which should carry out the regulation of the flow of the lower 
 river in the interest of irrigation, for the development of power, and for flood 
 control should be the United States; but if private parties are ready to under- 
 take the work, subject to such control by Federal Government and such regula- 
 tions as may be necessary to properly guard conflicting interests and establish 
 rights, there can be no valid objection to granting such private parties per- 
 mission to proceed with the work. 
 
 In no event should the right to control be passed on to the several States 
 which are interested in the conservation and use of the waters of the Colorado 
 River and its tributaries. It is well enough for the Colorado River Commission, 
 which is now functioning with Mr. Herbert C. Hoover at its head, to define 
 the relative interests of these States in the waters of the river, but despite 
 all that any of these States can do in the matter of putting the water to bene- 
 ficial use there will still be a surplus to flow down the river into its lower reaches 
 and the works here under discussion will certainly be carried out in some 
 form. 
 
 If the United States undertakes the work, then suitable provision should be 
 made for wholesnling the water to the districts that are irrigated with water 
 that is made available by storage, a fair charge should be made to the power 
 companies who obtain power from this source for distribution, and annual 
 benefits should be assessed against the regions which are benefited by flood 
 control, or, of course, there might be an equivalent immediate or early return 
 to the United States of capital investment, which could best be accomplished by 
 issuing bonds and turning the same over to the United States. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. We will now hear Mr. Criswell. I believe you are president of 
 the City Council of Los Angeles, Mr. Criswell. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. RALPH CRISWELL, PRESIDENT OF THE CITY 
 COUNCIL, LOS ANGELES, CALIF. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes, sir; I am president of the city council of Los Angeles. We 
 in Los Angeles, of course, are interested in this problem in the Imperial Valley, to 
 tliis extent, that our wholesalers and jobbers supply the merchants in that 
 territory and our financiers have money invested there in the form of loans,, 
 which has been brought out, are not very safe at the present time. The pros- 
 perity of that country adds to the prosperity of the city of Los Angeles, but 
 we are particularly interested in the power which may be developed at the 
 Boulder Canyon Dam. The city of Los Angeles for a number of years has been 
 engaged in the generation and distribution of hydro electric power. We have 
 something like $25,000,000 invested in that project now. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. That was in connection with the construction of the Owens 
 River Aqueduct? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. That is in connection with the Owens River Aqueduct. We 
 have not power possibilities sufficient to meet our demands for power, and we 
 have for some years been looking about, prospecting for other power sites. 
 Some of these sites on which we hnve spent considerable money for preliminary 
 survey, and so forth, are not the best sites and can not develop power nearly 
 as cheaply as it can be developed at the Boulder Canyon. Therefore, we are 
 interested in the building of the dam at Boulder Canyon and the allocation: 
 of the power privileges at that dam.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 101 
 
 For three or four years our power department has not encouraged, and in 
 fact has refused to negotiate with people who desire to locate factories or 
 smelters or refineries in Los Angeles, because we did not feel that we were 
 safe in guaranteeing power at a given cost. If we could have allocated to us 
 a proportion of the power to be developed at that dam, that problem would 
 be solved and some of the tentative sites which we are now working upon in 
 the Sierra Nevada Mountains would be abandoned by the city. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Are you meeting with objection in northern California to 
 development by the city of Los Angeles of power sites in the Sierra Nevada 
 Mountains north of the Tehachapi Pass? 
 
 Mr. Cms WELL. Yes; I had reference to those. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In other words, the people of that section of the State believe 
 that power developed in that territory should be utilized in northern Cali- 
 fornia and not transported to southern California? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. We have been told that that is their attitude. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. What is the maximum amount of power that the city of Los 
 Angeles would like to have from the proposed development at the Boulder 
 ( 'anyon Dam? 
 
 Mr. < 'itiswELL. The city of Los Angeles at the present time has installation 
 for about 100,000 horsepower. We are actually developing 75,000 horsepower 
 and are to-day purchasing from a private power company about 35,000 horse- 
 power. 
 , Mr. B ARBOUR. Is that all used by the city? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. That is all used by the city. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Does the city own its own plant? 
 
 Mr. CUISWELL. The city owns generating plants of its own along the line of 
 the aqueduct. 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. Does that include the power used on the railway lines? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. That does not include the power used by the street railways, 
 no. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. Could you say how much is being used by the street railways? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I do not have that figure in mind. 
 
 We are getting a very high degree of efficiency from our installation at the 
 present time. Ordinarily a plant does not turn out more than two-thirds firm 
 horsepower <>f the amount of the installation. We are getting about three- 
 fourths. The city of Los Angeles is in this position; we do not want to say at 
 this time the amount of horsepower we would like to have allocated to us, fur- 
 ther than this, that after all communities in the Southwest Arizona, Nevada, 
 and California -after all other communities have been allocated the power 
 which they want and which the Secretary of the Interior feels he is justified 
 in allocating to them, the city of Los Angeles will agree to take all that is left. 
 We will enter into a contract to that effect. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. Would that plan of utilization insure the full development 
 of the plant in the beginning? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. It would. It is our opinion that a certain amount of power 
 or power possibilities should be reserved by the Secretary of the Interior for 
 future allocation to communities that can not act at 'the present time that 
 might be slower to act than are some of the cities that have been figuring on this 
 for sometime and are ready to act; that those power possibilities should be 
 reserved for future allocation, but the city of Los Angeles would agree that 
 if nobody took any power and if half of that power, we will say, was reserved 
 at the present time, we will pay for the power that is allocated to us a sum 
 sufficient to meet the interest and the sinking fund charges, and we will get 
 cheap power then. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Do you mean interest and sinking fund on the entire cost of 
 the project? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. On the entire cost of the project. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. That was stated yesterday to be about $8,000,000 a year. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Something like that. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Do you believe that Los Angeles could afford to pay $8,000.000 a 
 year for this proposition on the Colorado River if they could get the power? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Well, I would not want to say $8,000,000, because I do not 
 have the figure in mind, and I haven't it in my notes here, but, I do say that 
 we have figured the cost of the dam and the cost of the installation of generat- 
 ing machinery and the cost of the transmission line, and we would be willing 
 to bear the burden, if necessary, on the whole proposition. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Providing you got power?
 
 102 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. . 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Providing we got the power. But we are not asking that, 
 understand that, gentlemen we are imt asking for any power until all of these 
 other communities have heen satisfied. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You refer to the Boulder Canyon Dam? 
 
 Mr. CKISWELL. To the Boulder Canyon Dam; yes. 
 
 Mr. P,ARi:oru. Following right along that line, would the city of Los Angeles 
 be willing to take over this Boulder Canyon project and construct the dam, if 
 the Government, permitted it to do s>. at ;s own expense? 
 
 Mr. CKISWELL. On account of limitations in our charter for bonding provisions 
 we could not do that, and that leads me to another point: Tn the suggestion 
 that is made by the Secretary of the Interor in his report to this committee 
 he suggests that bonds be issued for the building of* these works and that those 
 bonds be sold at a bonus if possible. I presume the idea he had in mind was 
 that the bonus would cover the interest on the bonds during the period of 
 construction. The charter of the city of Los Angeles would prohibit us from 
 ] laying a bonus, but we can accomplish it directly by contracting that we will 
 agree to pay this interest during construction, but we could not agree to 
 nay a bonus for bonds, and I doubt very much whether there is a municipality 
 in southern California that could pay a bonus for the bonds; and many of 
 them, including perhaps Los Angeles, could not purchase bonds but we could 
 find a purchaser. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. What is your idea for the city of Los Angeles as a munici- 
 pality to purchase some of these bonds? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I just said that I doubt whether we could under our charter 
 limitations do so. but we could find a purchaser. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR, If they could be purchased at par? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I doubt whether we could purchase them even at par. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Have you heard any suggestion as to the per cent of 
 power to be reserved for future development? Has there been a suggestion 
 made along that line? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. No ; there have been no percentages figured out that I know 
 of. You understand that the installation of power machinery there would ex- 
 tend over a number of years before it could all be installed, even though we 
 worked as rapidly as possible. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. In the statement which you made a moment ago. did you 
 have in mind the future development in the State, which you enumerated for 
 allocation? 
 
 Mr. CKISWELL. I did : in my suggestion that a portion of this power, a cer- 
 tain percentage of it, should be reserved for future allocation. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. That is, the city of Los Angeles, after allocation to Ari- 
 zona, Nevada, and California outside of Los Angeles, would be willing to take 
 the surplus power? 
 
 Mr. CRTSWELL. That was my statement. That is what I meant to say. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. With reservation for future development in those particu- 
 lar States? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Cri swell, does your city charter permit you to dispose of elec- 
 tric energy that the city has control of outside of the city of Los Angeles? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Would it permit it? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yes. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. It would permit us to dispose of it yes but under a contract 
 which we entered into with the Southern California Edison Co. when we 
 purchased their distributing system inside of the city we agreed not to interfere 
 with their market outside of the city, but any surplus power we generate shall 
 be sold to that company at a price fixed by the State railroad commission. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now, supposing the power was allocated to Utah, Colorado, and 
 New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada, to certain large cities outside of Los 
 Angeles, and the balance to be taken by Los Angeles, would it be your pur- 
 pose and intent in taking your line from Boulder Canyon to Los Angeles to 
 supply the small cities and communities in southern California with elec- 
 tric energy at the same price that you supplied it to the people of Los 
 Angeles ? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. That is a detail that I have never heard discussed. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well, it is a detail so big what I am getting at is this: Here 
 are a number of thriving communities south and east of Los Angeles that in and 
 of themselves are financially unable, say, to install a plant or to get any
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 103 
 
 Allocation: would it he the disposition of Los Angeles to supply these people 
 with this electric energy, you people having secured a very large block of it? 
 
 Mr. CUISWELL. It would lie the disposition of the city of Los Angeles to assist 
 those other municipalities in any way that it could. 
 
 Mr. HAKER. Would there he any disposition to not supply it? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I think not. 
 
 Mr. KAKKR. I make myself plain on that, I hope. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Do you not think it ought to be arranged so that if. say, 300,000 
 horsepower was allocated to Los Angeles, because she could pay for it and take 
 it and agree to do it, that you should in turn supply these smaller communities 
 on the line and within a reasonable distance from your main line'.' 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I think, Judge, it would be necessary to enter into some kind 
 of an arrangement with the smaller municipalities themselves for a general 
 transmission line to a central substation in the territory that might then break 
 up the big voltage and supply the smaller communities. 
 
 Mr. KAKKR. That would in substance be carrying out what I asked. 
 
 Mr. Cut SWELL. Yes. Now, I might say, Mr. Chairman, that Mr. E. F. Scat- 
 tergood, the chief electrical engineer of Los Angeles, who came here with us on 
 this matter, was taken ill and is now in the hospital, but I would like permis- 
 sion for him to file a statement covering some of these technical points after 
 he is able to do so. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is there any objection to that? If not, that will be authorized. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I believe that is all I have to say. 
 
 -Mr. BANKHEAD. I am rather surprised I have not been out in that section, 
 and I am rather surprised to know of the large consumption of power electric 
 power in Los Angeles. What are the main industries in your city that con- 
 sume this large amount of power, outside of your own municipal plants? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. There are a large number of factories perhaps none of them 
 so great in themselves, except the (Joodyear Tire Co.. which takes a large 
 block of power but I think the last census of the United States shows that 
 the city of Los Angeles is. in value of manufactured products, the tenth city 
 in the United States. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. Are they of the general nature usually made in industrial 
 centers? 
 
 Mr. CRISWKI.L. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. BARKOI-R. And those industries consume electric power to a very large 
 extent? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. To a very large extent: yes. sir. And those that now derive 
 rheir power from fuel oil would prefer to change over to electric power. 
 
 Mr. BANK HEAD. How far is Los Angeles from Boulder Canyon? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. About 260 miles, approximately. We are now bringing our 
 \vater from 240 miles away, so that we are not concerned about bringing electric 
 energy i_'(5i> miles. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. In bringing electrical energy from Boulder Canyon to tbe 
 city of Los Angeles what percentage is lost in transmission? 
 
 Mi-. CIJISWEIL. That is a technical question that I will call Mr. Scattergood's 
 attention to and have him incorporate his answer in his statement. 
 
 Mr. BARROVR. The Southern California Kdison Co. is already bringing power 
 into Los Angeles from as great a distance, is it not, as Boulder Canyon? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes: a greater distance. The Southern California Edison Co. 
 brings power in from the P.ig ('reek country up in the Sierra Nevadas. which is 
 nearly 300 miles away. 
 
 Mi-. RAKER. Mr. Criswell. you are chairman of the City Council of Los 
 Angeles? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now. I suppose that with the water transportation facilities, 
 the railroad transportation facilities that now exist, and the prospective boule- 
 vards and roads leading from all parts of the West to Los Angeles, with the 
 climatic conditions and the territory surrounding Los Angeles, judging from 
 what has occurred, you expect in the near future Los Angeles to be the first 
 city in the United States in manufacturing? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Now. I am afraid. Judge, that if I answered that question 
 truthfully as I see it I might be accused of coming down here to boost Los 
 Angeles. 
 
 1316 22 PT 3 3
 
 104 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. UAKER. No; now, that question involves this Boulder Canyon construc- 
 tion project, and it is a matter for them to investigate now to see whether or 
 not your statement is true. 
 
 Mr. CRTS WELL. I will say this in. answer to your question, that if we can 
 have assurance that the Boulder Canyon dam is to be built and that Los 
 Angeles will receive an allocation of a fair share of that power, the next 
 census the next Federal census will show not more than two cities in the 
 United States larger than the city of Los Angeles. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. That is. in population or in industries? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. In both. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then in substance you answer my question affirmatively V 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAKER. And that ought to be an inducement for the construction of a dam 
 like the Boulder Canyon Dam. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. What is the present population of Los Angeles? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. About 715,000. 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Your district lies north of San Francisco, does it not, Judge 
 Raker? [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Criswell, do I understand, then, that your estimate is that by 
 the time this Boulder Canyon Dam could be built your town would be the 
 third city in the United States? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. If we can have the assurance that we can supply power to the 
 manufacturers who wish to locate there. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Is there anything in the past history of the city that shows a 
 comparative development that would tend to that that soon? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You have been going that way, have you ? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. The history of the city of Los Angeles confirms my statement. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You have been growing at that rate? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. We have been growing at that rate. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I am very much interested in your statements relative to the 
 allocation of power. There appear to be two theories on that subject. One is 
 that the city of Los Angeles has sought to obtain all the power to be developed 
 at Boulder Canyon to the exclusion of other users, and that there will not be 
 power enough to go around. Then there is another theory which has been 
 advanced before this committee, that all other power development on the Col- 
 orado River should be prohibited for fear there will not be market for all the 
 power that can be developed at Boulder Canyon. Now. which theory do you 
 believe that the committee should adopt in that regard? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I think you should go along the line that the Boulder Canyon 
 project should be built and the financing of it taken care of before other 
 projects are taken up. That is simply to make you people here in Washington 
 feel absolutely safe on the investment. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. But, in your judgment, there is no doubt but what all the power 
 generated at Boulder Canyon will be promptly used? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. I have no doubt whatever on that point. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. To carry Mr. Hayden's question a little further, a market can be 
 provided for it, and if there is a doubt that certain industries and places might 
 use it all. so much the better, but there is enough opportunity up the river to 
 develop almost as much again. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. The river will develop about 10 times as much. The firm 
 horsepower will be between 600.000 and 700,000 developed there. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. At Boulder Canyon? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. At Boulder Canyon. The installation would probably be one 
 million horsepower and it would develop about two-thirds of that. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. Primary power. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. Firm horsepower all the year round. And there can be de- 
 veloped on the river, the engineers say. about 6.000.000 horsepower. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So the development of Boulder Canyon and the allocation of the 
 power to actual use, the determination of construction charges and interest 
 would not deter any other communities from future development, because there 
 is plenty of opportunity up the river for developing almost ten times as much. 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. There is. And in regard to the statement that was made that 
 Los Angeles had been charged with a desire to take all or control all of the 
 power on the Colorado River, the city of Los Angeles has never at any time 
 had any such vision in its mind ; all we want is a fair share of the power for
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 105 
 
 ourselves, and we want all the other communities in the Southwest to have 
 allocated to them all the power that they can use. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How many people have you in Los Angeles now? 
 
 Mr. CRISWELL. About 715.000, according to our last school census. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How many did you have 10 years ago? 
 
 Mr. OKI SWELL. Ten years ago in 1910 we had 319.000. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And in 1883 you had 15,000. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Are there any other questions, gentlemen? If not, Mr. Hoodenpyl, 
 will you state your relation to the matter and just whom you represent? 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. GEORGE HOODENPYL, CITY ATTORNEY OF 
 LONG BEACH, CALIF. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I am city attorney of the city of Long Beach. Long Beach 
 is a city of some 50,000 people according to the last census, situated a little 
 east of south of the city of Los Angeles. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How long have they been getting that bunch together? 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. In 1900 we had 2.250 people; in 1910 we had 17,000; in 
 1920, 55,000. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. What is going to happen next? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. One hundred thousand probably 125,000 by the next census. 
 Mr. LITTLE. What are the resources of that city? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Well, we have one particular resource that most everybody 
 laughs about when we mention it. and that is climate. We have the ocean ; we 
 have a wonderful residence section. A great many people are coming to 
 southern California for homes who desire to live in the city of Long Beach 
 because it has a mild climate. It has a south exposure on the ocean and is 
 protected from the winds by the Palo Verde Hills, which makes it one of the 
 most attractive, eveu-temperatured cities on the coast. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. What proportion of the able-bodied men there are 
 engaged in some active work? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. One hundred per cent. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I think the percentage is larger than that. [Laughter.] 
 I will say very frankly that we have a population of at least 33J per cent that 
 are there simply to spend the money they make back East, or have made back 
 East, and I think !t is the most delightful place in the world for business men 
 who have made their fortunes in business. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You are fishing to have us move out there? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Well, it is a dangerous proposition to come out there unless 
 you want to stay. [Laughter.] 
 
 Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Is ir the prediction of some of the residents of Long 
 Beach that when the next census is taken Los Angeles may be a suburb of 
 Long Beach V 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. No, I think not. I am like Mr. Crlsswell. I would not go 
 fhat far. but the city of Long Beach although it is a long distance, comparatively, 
 from Imperial Valley, is interested in two ways in this proposition, otherwise 
 they would not have sent me here as a representative to come before this com- 
 mittee and present what I could to aid in getting the Government to promptly 
 improve and develop the Colorado R'ver. The Imperial Valley is what we call 
 our back country, our agricultural section, and in a general way the prosperity 
 of southern California and of the Southwest, depends upon the protection of 
 that valley and the protection of the territory in Arizona : and whatever pro- 
 tection can he afforded there, and whatever Improvements can be made in 
 Arizona <>r in Nevada, are a benefit to the whole Southwest, and to that extent 
 the city of Long Beach is indirectly benefited because the prosperity of that 
 section will be shared in by the city of Long Beach equally with other cities. 
 1 can conceive of no greater calamity eveij to the city of Long Beach than the 
 destruction of the Imperial Valley and it would affect the whole southwest 
 in the same way. It would be a permanent destruction if this water goes into 
 the valley. In that way the city of Long Beach is interested, and sufficiently 
 interested to expend its money to send a representative here to let you gentle- 
 men know its interest in the matter and to urge you to action along th's line. 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask the gentleman a question? Have you formed any 
 estimate as to how much value would be immediately destroyed if that Im- 
 perial Valley were flooded? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Well, it is difficult to say what you mean by immediate 
 destruction. If an opening in the river is permitted there, as Mr. Bacon said.
 
 106 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 and as the engineers generally agree, it would be a difficult problem to close 
 the opening in the river. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. What I mean is. if they did not close it. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. If they did not close it there would be an enor.nous in- 
 jury. The engineers can give yon the area, the exact figures of what would bo 
 flooded, but it would destroy the cities of Calexico, Brawley, El Centre, and 
 Imperial. And I understand that the crop reports last year showed $65,000,000 
 worth of produce from that valley of California. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. And all that produce would be destroyed, that $63.000,000 
 worth, would it not? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Absolutely. The people would be driven out of their homes, 
 and besides that all of the improvements in the city, the railroad, and every- 
 thing else there, would be under water. 
 
 Mr. UAKEK. It would not only be the $65,000,000, or $80,000,000 a year, but 
 it would be a permanent destruction. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. It would be a permanent destruction of the present values, 
 also. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. And in addition to that, the balance of the land, if irrigated, 
 would be brought into production and add almost as much as you are produc- 
 ing now. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. The limit of this will at least double the irrigable area in 
 that section, not all of which would be under the sea level, though. 
 
 Another point along that line that has not been touched upon is this, that 
 the Imperial Valley produces a crop which is early, largely cantaloupes and 
 things like that berries that would not compete with the general farmers 
 throughout the country, and the urging of the objection that there is enough 
 land tillable at the present time would not be effective as against the Im- 
 perial Valley because the products there are largely not competitive with 
 the balance of the country. 
 
 The city of Long Beach is directly interested in this proposition of power. 
 We believe that if this dam is constructed by the Federal Government, power 
 can be laid down in southern California much cheaper than we get it now from 
 the private corporations. The industrial section of the city of Long Beach is 
 just across the line from an industrial section of the city of Los Angeles. Los 
 Angeles has extended its quarters to the coast. We are handicapped in our 
 efforts to obtain industries by reason of this fact : The city of Los Angeles 
 having its municipal system not only its distributing system, but owning also 
 its producing system is able to sell electricity across the line from the city of 
 Long Beach at 5* cents per kilowatt hour that is the domestic rate while the 
 city of Long Beach, across this imaginary line, is required to pay to the private 
 corporation 7.92 cents per kilowatt hour. Now, the ratio of this rate, this 
 domestic rate, is carried out proportionately in the industrial rates. There 
 are no physical differences between the territory inside of the city of Long 
 Beach and the territory inside of the city of Los Angeles. We both have city 
 water and can meet any competition for municipal water in the city of Long 
 Beach, but we can not meet the power situation. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Explain to the committee what is the matter with the railroad 
 commission that they are not adjusting this difference. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. The railroad commission has recently rendered a decision 
 reducing the rate in the city of Long Beach from 9 cents to 7.92 cents per kilo- 
 watt hour. Now. it is claimed that under the investments on the privately 
 owned utility, in order to give them a return of 8 per cent, it is necessary that 
 this rate be maintained. That brings me to another reason as to why tin's 
 should be developed by the Federal Government instead of by private cor- 
 porations to meet that very proposition. 
 
 The Edison Co. the Southern California Edison Co. is one of the largest 
 producers of electricity in the country, and I presume it has as high a standing 
 and can borrow money as cheaply as* any private corporation or private utility 
 in the United States. The railroad commission lias permitted it, and it has paid 
 s per cent for money borrowed to use for development purposes. Now. it is 
 necessary for that return to be made. The Federal Government can undoubtedly 
 borrow money for at least 2 to 3 per cent less than any public utility can borrow 
 it. In view of that, if the Federal Government constructs this dam it will save 
 to the consumer, who must ultimately pay the cost of construction and for all 
 money that is hired to go into the project, not less than 2 per cent on the invest- 
 ment. Now, that is one reason that the city of Los Angeles can serve electric 
 energy at a rate less than the railroad commission fixes for the public utilities,
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 107 
 
 because of the fact that the city of Los Angeles does not have to make that high 
 return. At the time that the public utility corporations were permitted to 
 borrow money at 8 per cent the city of Los Angeles was able to borrow it at 
 6, which allowed it 2 per cent difference there, and that contributed to the 
 cheapness of the project. 
 
 Now, I think the Federal Government should not make a profit out of this 
 power or out of the construction of this dam ; but I think it is to the interest of 
 the country at large, and particularly the interest of the Southwest, that this 
 electric energy be given to the people at cost. The cost of the electric energy is 
 reflected in all the manufactured products that are produced in that section, 
 and it is reflected in all the agricultural products, because it is necessary for 
 every agriculturist in southern California, practically all of them, to use elec- 
 tricity more or less ; and the cheaper this is placed upon the farm and placed 
 to the manufacturer, the cheaper the product will be, and therefore the cheaper 
 will be the product to the public that is the ultimate consumer. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. When you speak of furnishing power and light at 
 cost, you moan including, of course, interest at 44 or 5 per cent on the amount 
 invested? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAXKHEAD. I^et me ask you this question : Conceding that the Government 
 could do that upon the basis of the statement made by Mr. Smith, at consid- 
 erably less cost than the companies that are now engaged in that private in* 
 <]ustry in thnt section, do you think it is entirely fair to them to have Govern- 
 ment competition of that sort based upon actual cost of production, plus amor- 
 tization of the plant? 
 
 Mr HOODEXPYT,. Well. I do not know any reason why they should not meet 
 that competition. They have to in the city of Los Angeles, Pasadena, and 
 Riverside. 
 
 Mr. BAXKHEAD. Does your California commission figure that the Government 
 should he repaid in interest ; that that plant should bear 4 or 5 per cent interest 
 on the cost of investment? 
 
 Mr. HOODEXPYL. Well, you could do that and still make it cheaper than the 
 cost at present. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. Then, would not the practical effect of that be to put them 
 out of business? 
 
 Mr. HOOUKNPYL. Not necessarily: because there will be. from our view of 
 it. as Mr. Crisswell stated, a greater demand than can be supplied. The 
 power developed in Boulder Canyon will not be sufficient to put the Edison Co. 
 out of business. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. Do you advocate Government ownership and operation of 
 a utility of that sort in competition with private industry engaged in the 
 same character of business? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYI,. Absolutely. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Especially in this instance, where you are preventing 
 the destruction of a great deal of property and also making available water 
 for the reclamation of lands that now have no value. 
 
 Mr. BAXKHEAD. I was just discussing the question of principle on that par- 
 ticular phase of it. 
 
 Mr. I-TOOIXEXPYT,. This water belongs to the people, it should be developed by 
 the people, and the people should have the benefit of it. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. What is the investment in reservoirs, dams, ditches, and trans- 
 mission lines in this territory south of the Tehachapi. owned by private indi- 
 viduals? 
 
 Mr. HOODKXPVL. I could nol give you any estimate on that. 
 
 Mr. YEAGER. I can give you that. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. Just tell us that, will you? 
 
 Mr. YEAGER. The Southern California Edison Co.. which serves im in the 
 San Joaquin Valley and part of southern California, lias about * 102.500,000, 
 as valued by the railroad commission: and (hen there is the Southern 
 Sierras, a much smaller company, and I do not know the figure on that. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. I suppose it will run altogether about $1 .",0.000,000? 
 
 Mr. YKAGEK. A little less than that. T would say. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. D you believe the Government ought to furnish the use of the 
 Mississippi River for navigation in competition with the railroads? 
 
 Mr. HOOOF.NPYL. Yes; I think so. I think they are doing it. 
 
 Mr. LTTTI.K. They have been doing it a long time. The Colorado is not 
 navigable to amount to anything?
 
 108 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Not for practical purposes. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. But it does have an exceptional amount of resource as a de- 
 veloper of electric power, does it not; more so. iwrhaps, than any other river in 
 the United States? 
 
 Mr. HOODKNPYL. I think so. 
 
 Mr. Lrrn.K. And don't you think that you people who live under it have just 
 as much right to expect the Government to assist in developing the electric- 
 power and irrigating resources of it as the people along the Mississippi have to 
 expect the Government to keep up their means of navigation? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. That is our view of it. Furthermore. I do not think you 
 need to anticipate that there is going to he any destruction or diminution of 
 the value of the properties of the public utilities. The sentiment in southern 
 California particularly is to huy out the distributing systems of the various 
 cities at a reasonable and fair price, not only of the value but also of the 
 severance damages. Los Angeles has recently taken over all of the distributing 
 systems of the Southern California Edison Co. within its limits. Pasadena has 
 done the same thing, and Santa Ana has done the same thing, and other cities 
 are moving to that end. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. May I ask you another question? Suppose that the development 
 of this power should, by competition or otherwise, develop a smaller rate of 
 profit in some big investment companies ; do you think that that would be any 
 worse than it would be for the Government to sit by and allow the farmers of 
 Imperial Valley, who produce 865.000.000 a year, to be wrecked and destroyed 
 entirely? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I do not. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. You think the farmers down there, who produce $65.000,000 
 worth of crops a year, are entitled to as much protection as the gentlemen who 
 get 7 or 8 per cent on their present investments, do you not? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I think they are entitled to equal protection, if not more. 
 
 Mr. HAKER. Let me ask you. from your observation, taking that southwestern 
 territory as it exists now. is there a sufficient electric energy, or is there a 
 general shortage all over that country? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. There is a general shortage. We have had to wait for 
 months there to get some 150 horsepower for a manufacturing plant in the city 
 of Long Beach. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now. may I ask a question in order to get the record clear, as I 
 understand it: and if I am wrong. I hope I will he corrected by some of you 
 gentlemen. Under the law as it now exists the California Railroad Commis- 
 sion fixes the rates of fares or charges for the furnishing of electric energy by 
 the public utility corporations? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. But the commission has not the power to do so in the case of the 
 city of Los Angeles: is that right? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. It has not. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That being the case, over all the rest of the State except Los 
 Angeles it fixes the rate 
 
 Mr. JOHN S. NICKEKSON (interposing). It has that i>ower. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now? 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. It has that power now. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Not over the city's plant. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I am talking about the city plant. 
 
 Mr. XK KKI:SON. If there is a public utility furnishing power in the city no\\. 
 they have the power over them. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In other words, they charge the same as the city fixes. Is 
 that correct? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I am not sure that I understand you, but the railroad 
 commission fixed the rates in the city of Los Angeles as long as it was served 
 by the Southern California Edison Co.. but when the city of Los Angeles 
 took over the distributing system, that portion of it that they did not take over 
 within the city of Los Angeles belonging to the Southern California Edison 
 <'.. then the railroad commission lost its jurisdiction of that that was owned 
 and o])eratecl by the nmnicipality. and I want to say on that score that im- 
 mediately upon taking over that system the city of Los Angeles reduced 
 materially the rates which had been fixed and which had been collected by 
 the Edison Co. with the approval of the railroad commission. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yon would not be in favor of having a competing system that 
 would drive out or absolutely ruin a business that had been built up. that
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 109 
 
 had done so much for the country as it is now, and that was regulated by a 
 State commission, would you? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Absolutely not. and 1 do not think there is any fear of that. 
 
 Mr. BANKHEAD. In other words, you believe that this water power there 
 is essential and profitable to the people, and that the Government should 
 use it so that the people at large will derive the greatest amount of benefit 
 from its use. 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. That is my view. 
 
 Mr. RANKHEAD. I think you are entirely right, sir. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Gentlemen, it is 12 o'clock. I presume we will be called to the 
 lioor of the House very soon. My understanding is that to-morrow is the 
 regular meeting day and we will meet to-morrow morning at 10.30. If you 
 have anything more to add I wish you would be here to-morrow, Mr. Hoodenpyl. 
 Do you want to add a few words now? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. I just wanted to add a few words. This is on the matter 
 of the suggestion of one apparent objection to this proposition of going ahead 
 immediately, and that is on the question of the allocation of power and the 
 allocation of water rights and priority use and such as that. 
 
 Now, then, this objection is met. absolutely and unequivocally and com- 
 pletely, if the engineers are correct that there is sufficient water to serve all 
 of the lands irrigable by the river. In other words, it is immaterial what alloca- 
 tion of power is made as between the States, if there is sufficient water. That 
 is the engineering answer. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. You have the same information from your engineers as to the 
 final resources of the river that Mr. Criswell had, have you? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. The same that Mr. Criswell had. Now, I want to add this 
 further thought: This power compact commission 'has, I understand, until the 
 1st, of January to make its agreement. If it does not agree by that date and 
 make its report, it is dissolved. If it does make an agreement and report by 
 that date that will have to go to the various States and be ratified by the legis- 
 latures, and by Congress, and that will take considerable time. 
 
 And as Mr. Hoover said yesterday, this matter should go ahead immediately. 
 When that commission makes a report and evidently it will make a report dur- 
 ing the year if that report is approved it can be written into the distribution 
 of this water and the distribution of this power, pending the construction of this 
 dam and this project; and it should not be delayed on that account; because 
 there will be no distribution of the power, and no distribution of the water, 
 until plenty of time shall have elapsed to permit of the adjustment of questions 
 involving the allocation of power and water, or the determination not to 
 allocate them ; and then it will be up to the Federal Government to proceed. 
 
 \o\v. just one other thought on that question and I am through : I do not 
 believe under the law any water is turned to beneficial use. or that any prior 
 right to the power is established by the construction of this dam. for this 
 reason: Whatever prior right is established would rest in the Federal Govern- 
 ment, and not in any individual nor in any property, nor would it become vested 
 in any way, except that it would lodge in the Federal Government ; and all 
 the States should have confidence in the Federal Government as to the proper 
 distribution of that power and the proper distribution of that water, and to 
 protect both the upstream and the lower stream. 
 
 Just one illustration to make that clear: There are 500.000 acres of land in 
 southern California and southern Arizona that could be irrigated. The Gov- 
 ernment builds this dam. but the right of that land to the water will not become 
 affixed and there will be no appropriation until the Federal Government 
 permits the water to go upon the land. And that is equivalent to saying this: 
 Suppose there are 100.000 acres of land in southern California that is irrigable 
 by this dam, and the Government says there is not sufficient water for that land 
 and the Government does not issue a permit for the water to go over it. Von 
 can not say tinder those circumstances that the water right attached to that 
 land, when the Government never permitted that water to go there. 
 
 And that argues, to my mind, that there will be no attachment of a prior 
 right until the water is permitted by the Government to go on the particular 
 piece of land. 
 
 I call your attention to that particularly, owing to the urgency of this matter, 
 and I hope that this matter will not be delayed indefinitely to wait for a 
 decision of the commission, or of the States pursuant to the decision of the 
 commission, or in the event that there is no decision until the time expires.
 
 110 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. Before you get through I would like to have you discuss this 
 question, or to have some one else discuss it during the hearings: Do you 
 think that the thing should be left up in the air. and that every legal step 
 should not be taken to secure the Government's permanent right in this water, 
 so that when it built the dam it would know definitely what its rights were? 
 
 Mr. HOODKNI-YL. The Government would have the permanent right. 
 
 Mr RAKER. But I do not think you people believe that it should all be left 
 in the air. but that there should be steps taken so that the Government will 
 know exactly what its rights arc. 
 
 Mr. HOOUKNPYL. That is true when this thing is concluded. But unless y.-u 
 h'nd some reason whereby the construction of this dam will violate a possible 
 right and I think it docs not violate any possible right I think you should 
 proceed to the construction of it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Your point is that the walls of the place where the dam is to be 
 built, being 2.000 feet high, there could be no diversicn at the dam? After 
 the dam is completed, there will subsequently be installed in the river below 
 at some point the necessary works for the diversion cf the water on the Cali- 
 fornia side or on the Arizona side, and that the diversion is the initial step 
 for the acquiring of the water right? 
 
 Mr. HOODENPYL. Yes: that would be the actual step. But I think whenever 
 the Government issued a permit for that diversion, that that would fix the 
 right as to the land covered by the permit ; and if there are 100.000 acres there 
 as to which the Government does not issue a permit, there can be no right. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well. I think there is something wrong in that theory, because 
 there is nothing to give a right there; when you build the dam there and held 
 back the Hood waters, you have got something for the Government: now. I 
 think you should hold that down legally, so that you have not only the dam 
 and the water under it. but have the right to go up the stream and control 
 that water. The Government should have the same right as an individual 
 or corporation if it puts in the dam and stores the flood waters. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Well, as this is to be constructed on the public domain, the Gov- 
 ernment will have absolute control of it: no private individual can acquire 
 any rights without the consent of the Government. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. I am not discussing that. I am saying that the Government 
 ought to be protected in its rights. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. I do not see any real disagreement between you and Mr. 
 Hoodenpyl in this matter. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Possibly there is not. but I am strong in protecting the Govern- 
 ment when it expends the peoples' money on enterprises like this, just as 
 it has been done on all the Government reclamation projects. 
 
 (Thereupon, at 12.05 p. m.. the committee adjourned until Friday. June 24. 
 1022. at 10.30 o'clock a. m.) 
 
 C'OMMITTKE OX IRRIGATION OF AKII) L.\M)S. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVE. 
 
 rriil'iit. .lunr .?.?. J!)22. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. in.. Hon. Nicholas J. Sinnott (acting 
 chairman) presiding. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. We will now hear Senator Evans, the mayor of Riverside. 
 Calif. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. S. C. EVANS, MAYOR OF RIVERSIDE, CALIF. 
 
 Mr. KVANS. Mr. Chairman. I will be very brief, because I want Mr. Xicker- 
 soii. of the Imperial Valley, to have as much time as possible. I was sent here 
 by the mayor and council of Riverside and the county supervisors to represent 
 them in this matter. I went to California in 1876. I do not pose as an ex- 
 pert, but my life has been spent on problems of this kind that is. in endeavor- 
 ing to prevent our lands from overflowing along the Santa Anna River and 
 other streams in California and in the development of land and the placing of 
 settlers thereon. A short time ago we had a very serious flood in the Palo 
 Verde Valley, which is shown on this map you have, I believe. I would like 
 to leave these photographs with you to show you the seriousness of that flood. 
 
 I went down at the request of the county supervisors and the Riverside city 
 council, and we were there three or four days forming a Red Cross organiza-
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. Ill 
 
 tion that took charge of anywhere from 40 to 75 families, about 30,000 acres of 
 land having been overflowed and about 2.000 crops having been destroyed. 
 I want to tell you that it would make your heart ache to see those families 
 huddled up there on the damp ground and little children without anything to 
 eat, without a blanket or anything at all. They had to get off in rowboats. on 
 planks, and in every other old way in order to get out at all. You can imagine 
 what a distressing thing it was. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Where does that appear on this map? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. That is the Palo Verde Valley, right at Blythe. The town of 
 Ripley. shown on these pictures, was entirely under water, including a $200,000 
 hotel. The water was standing about 4 feet on the lower floor of the hotel. 
 The Hood came so quick, and they usually come quick, that the people did not 
 have any time at all to even take the chickens out. or rheir clothing. They 
 had to practically run for it. As I see it. this problem is an emergency one. 
 I have been familiar with the Imperial Valley since its development first 
 started. I went down there first with a team of horses before there was any- 
 thing in the Imperial Valley, before there was even a road run. and I have 
 seen every one of those towns start up and grow. I have been across thte 
 Mexican border about 60 miles below the border and have seen those other 
 lands that belong to the people in Mexico. 
 
 There is no question at all about the tremendous urgency of this matter. 
 As has already been stated to you, if that valley tills, of course it absolutely 
 no outlet. I saw it when the river broke over into the Salton Sea. Many 
 Riverside people went down there to look at it. It looked as though the South- 
 ern Pacific Railroad tracks would be entirely destroyed. When I first went 
 there, there was no transcontinental Southern Pacific Railroad through that 
 section. When this flood broke through, in 1905 or 1906. or after that flood, 
 the track was moved farther up the hill. It has been moved farther upon the 
 hill each time there has been a flood. The flood continued to come in and, 
 of course, that meant that the land was damp, which made the problem more 
 difficult, and it would not take much more to absolutely destroy that valley. 
 My county is so intimately interested in the Imperial Valley that it is hard 
 to talk of anything concerning one without talking about the other. The State 
 highway authorities of our State are building a concrete road clear through 
 the eastern end of Riverside County into Imperial County and clear down to 
 the Mexican border. There are many communities in our county, including 
 Coachella, Mecca. Thermal, and Blythe. that have the same nature of soil as 
 that in the Imperial Valley, and hundreds of our farmers are financially inter- 
 ested in this matter in a great many ways. They raise in that soil a product 
 that is not raised at any other place. In Riverside County, in the higher lands, 
 where the cost of water is considerable, we can raise crops like lemons, oranges, 
 and other citrus fruits, because those are crops that will stand that cost of 
 water. On this lainl where only trees grow, you find very few dairies. 
 
 The operations are almost altogether handled by tractors. In this other 
 class of land you find large dairies, with horses, cattle, sheep, hogs, and all 
 kinds of animals. Dean Hunt, of the University of California, has traveled 
 tip and down that section of the State calling attention to the importance to 
 our agriculture of the development of dairies and the absolute necessity for 
 an increase of animal husbandry in our part of the State if our agriculture is 
 to endure. He made a very startling statement not long ago when he said that 
 the people of Riverside County could afford to pull up a whole lot of orange 
 trees and other citrus fruit trees and put in alfalfa and other vegetable crops. 
 if ny doing so they could encourage the dairy industry, because that would 
 give them proper fertilizer in the growing of citrus fruits. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The dairy industry in the Imperial Valley would have to he on 
 land that is not now irrigated? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir; those are the only lands that would appeal to those 
 people who would like to go into that industry. Of course, some citrus fruits 
 are raised down there, but they are not anything like what they have in other 
 counties where they raise them on higher land. There are some very tine and 
 excellent fruit grown, hut it is mainly devoted to general farming, on account 
 of the peculiar soil conditions and the ease with which it is- cultivated, to- 
 gether with the relative cheapness of the water. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Are there not a great many cantaloupes raised in the Imperial 
 Valley? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir: there are a great many cantaloupes, cotton, and onions 
 grown. It is the only place, with the exception of a very limited area in River-
 
 112 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 side County, where dates are successfully raised. It might interest you to say 
 that I have seen date trees, larger than those round columns on the Capitol 
 transported successfully from one place to another. 
 
 Now, let me say that Riverside is a city of about 22,000 population, and that 
 valley is something like the rest of that country. Twenty years or more ago 
 we started our municipal electric lighting system. We buy power from the 
 Southern California Edison Co. and some from the Southern Sierras Co.. generat- 
 ing a small portion of it ourselves. We are municipal ownership people, as are 
 most of the people in that section of the country, including Los Angeles. Long- 
 beach, San Bernardino, and other places. I try in a small way. to run some 
 pumping plants, and there is a large number of people about my size that run 
 two, three, four, or five sets of pumping plants. Personally, I run four. I run 
 three of those plants on power procured from the city of Riverside, and the 
 fourth one I am not able to attach electricity to, because only an outside com- 
 pany could serve it, and I can not get a rate from them that would justify me 
 in attaching electricity to it. I think it is a fair question, and you have indi- 
 cated that in some of the questions you have asked the others, why this lower 
 rate can be given by our city: Public utility companies are supposed to pay 
 all of the State expense. We have an ad valorem tax for county and municipal 
 purposes, and, of course, with them paying a State tax and our municipal plant 
 not paying any is, perhaps, one reason why they, in justice to themselves, must 
 be allowed a little higher rate than we are allowed. 
 .Mr. SMITH. What do you mean by an ad valorem duty? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. We are assessed and taxed on an ad valorem basis. They are 
 allowed their rate by the State railroad commission. We believe in regulating 
 public utilities. 
 
 1 think that is about all I care to say, other than this: I never have heard a 
 word uttered in southern California, and I go around a good deal, indicating any 
 desire on the part of Los Angeles or any particular city or locality to get more 
 than its due portion of this water or power. We realize that primarily this is 
 for flood control, and I think we realize the great urgency of the situation 
 there. It would really be a catastrophe if Imperial Valley were obliterated, 
 and that is what it would mean if the river broke over, as it intends to some 
 day, unless something is done to prevent it. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. You said that your city of Riverside and other cities in southern 
 California would be willing to come in on the same basis as Los Angeles toward 
 the reimbursement of the Government for the most of the proposed project. 
 
 Mr. EVANS. So far as I have heard, our people express themselves; yes, sir. 
 Of course we are not in as favorable a position 'as the city of Los Angeles. Los 
 Angeles is in a unique position. In population and assessed values Los Angeles 
 exceeds all of these other places. In its total assessed value it exceeds a num- 
 ber of the Eastern States or a number of the Middle ?]astern States. If you 
 have a visual presentation of it. you will realize that it is really wonderful how 
 that section of the country has grown. Of course we would be bound by the 
 laws, rules, and regulations that would govern in this matter. Certain towns 
 in that section, like Riverside, Santa Ana. San Bernardino, and places of that 
 size, would get together and figure out their fair proportion of this power. 
 I have attended some of those meetings in Arizona and several in Los Angeles, 
 and I have never heard anyone voice the thought that any one of the cities 
 along the Colorado River would have more than its fair proportion of this 
 power. 
 
 We realize that this is a tremendously big thing, and we feel that the United 
 States Government is the only power or the only agency to build it. Now, this 
 Government is yours and mine, and if we have not faith in its justice and 
 ability to work these things out. where in the world can we go to have anything 
 done on a big scale? It is too tremendously big for us to undertake it locally, 
 and we want you people in your wisdom to take it up. As to the details of the 
 laws you will enact for the future development of the Colorado River, all of 
 our people are perfectly willing to leave that to Congress. All that we want 
 is a fair distribution of the water and power, upon such terms as will in time 
 take care of this whole expense with a reasonable rate of interest upon the cost. 
 We are perfectly willing in our section of the country to do that. I have never 
 heard anybody say anything to the contrary- 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. About what is the total population of those smaller cities 
 that you have mentioned? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. They are all about the size of Riverside. They are cities of 
 about from twelve, fifteen, eighteen, twenty, or twenty -two thousand people.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 113 
 
 Mr. WIIJUAMSON. Are they growing rapidly V 
 
 Mr. EVANS. All of them are growing rapidly. You have no idea how those 
 concrete roads are building up the cities. Those roads are drawing the towns 
 right together. I remember that I went through what is now Longheach years 
 ago in a farm wagon, and I camped there right on the sand, where the town is 
 now located. There was absolutely nothing there then, and I am still a com- 
 paratively young man. I have seen Los Angeles grow from a very few thou- 
 sand population to nearly 80O.IMM) population. I want to tell you gentlemen that 
 you do not realize what the climate, the roads, and the boosting spirit of south- 
 ern California can accomplish. You can not realize the absolute money-making 
 possibilities, both in industrv and agriculture, that are being built up there. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Is it due to the climate or the soil? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. It is both the climate and the soil, and it is the everlasting stick- 
 at-it-iveness of the people, and their go-get-it spirit. They go out after those 
 things, and they certainly get them. Primarily I am an agriculturist, and I 
 look upon the agricultural side of it more than upon the industrial side of it, 
 because that has been my life work. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. The great success of that country down there is largely due to 
 the enthusiastic spirit of the people. 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Y'es. sir : we are all of one mind down there. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You say that you went to California in 1876, and are still com- 
 paratively young. I went there in 1873. and I consider myself a kid. Four or 
 five months ago There was some propaganda started by various cities in south- 
 e'rn California with regard to the power situation, and they sent us clippings 
 in regard to it. 
 
 Mr. EVANS . v,. s . sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. That was in regard to Los Angeles getting the Colorado River? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. That has all been adjusted now? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir: it has been adjusted very nicely. Naturally. I might 
 say. the people of the small communities have had some suspicion in regard to 
 these things, and there has been some feeling against the great centers of 
 population, with their financial ability and quickness of action in taking hold 
 of things. Naturally, the common people in these smaller communities be- 
 came suspicious, and a lot of small papers came out with those statements. 
 However, that has been adjusted at several public meetings. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. I suppose that your statement, so far as Riverside is concerned, 
 would apply as well to the other towns you have referred to outside of River- 
 side'/ 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. UAKKR. You would like to see it allocated among all of those cities, so 
 that, if the (iovernment should put in a main transmission line, all of them 
 could have an opportunity to use this power at such a price as would pay 
 back the original investment, with a reasonable rate of interest'/ 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir. I was at a meeting at Santa Ana. in which the mayors 
 of about 10 of those cities took part, and they all gave voice to the same 
 sentiment. 
 
 Mr. RAKKI:. I understand that Santa Ana. Orange, and some other of those 
 cities are short of power now? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. And the development of this Moulder Canyon Dam. with its 
 600.(MMI horsepower, would not in any way interfere with the general develop- 
 ment there now'/ 
 
 Mr. EVANS. No. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. There would be sufficient use for the power now generated, as 
 well as for that which might be generated by the Boulder Caiiyan I>am'/ 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir: I do not know where else they could go to get it. 
 
 Mr. WIIXIAMSON. As to those smaller towns, would they have to have the 
 current distributed by Los Angeles, or would they be able to cooperate and 
 build some central distributing station of their own so as to distribute the 
 electric current'/ 
 
 Mr. EVANS. That is a detail, and I do not know whether Los Angeles would 
 build a distributing system from which those towns would take current, or 
 whether we would have to provide for the distribution ourselves. In Cali- 
 fornia we have been up against this proposition before, and when we did not 
 have a law to meet the emergency we went to the State legislature and had 
 them to make one. We will come throuirh on this proposition ]\\ some means, 
 and we will pay this bill.
 
 114 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASTX. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. You have no doubt that you will secure cooperation, so 
 that this current will he taken care of and used? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. I have no doubt about it, for the reason that we have practically 
 reached the limit in that direction now. If we do not secure this, we have 
 practically reached the limit of our growth. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. Your view is this, that your people would arrange at an early 
 date so as to be able to assure the authorities before the money was expended 
 that you would be on hand to use the power as soon as it was ready for de- 
 livery. 
 
 Mr. EVANS. We will either do that, or let Los Angeles take all of it. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. I suppose you would all get together and pi>t in a main transmN- 
 sion line and have a main distribution point. Otherwise, it would be almost 
 criminal negligence or destruction of property, because one main distribution 
 line would serve the purpose. 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes. sir. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. W. J. CARE,, PASADENA, CALIF. 
 
 Mr. CAKK. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I represent th*> 
 city of Pasadena. I live at Pasadena, and am a practicing attorney in the 
 city of Los Angeles. I am not a city official, but I am employed by the city of 
 Pasadena to come here and state its [position in regard to this matter. Pasa- 
 dena, of course, like all the cities of southern California, is tremendously in- 
 terested in the Imperial Valley problem and menace. We feel there that 
 whatever hurts the Imperial Valley will hurt us, and that whatever helps the 
 Imperial Valley will help us. AYe are very much impressed with the appealing 
 character of this project. We are directly interested in the power end of it. 
 The city of Pasadena, like the city of Riverside, has had its own municipal 
 lighting system for a great many years. It has its own generating plant, and 
 it has a complete distributing system. I might say that the city of Pasadena 
 has perhaps, 50,000 inhabitants. At the present time Pasadena buys its power 
 at wholesale, and it finds it much more advantageous to do that. For the part 
 obtained from the city of Los Angeles, under an old contract which is very ad- 
 vantageous, they pay 0.06 cent per kilowatt hour, and for the part ir obtains 
 from a private company it pays a price about twice that. 
 
 The city of Pasadena, looking toward the future and endeavoring to pro- 
 vide for its future wants, desires a more permanent power supply for its needs. 
 Pasadena has a large bonding capac'ty. It is extremely anxious to participate 
 in this project, and will he glad to take such power as may be fairly allotted to 
 it. I think we can act more promptly in a financial way than any ordinary 
 private corporation. The people of Pasadena have always voted bonds by very 
 large majorities for anything that was necessary for the extension or develop- 
 ment of its lighting system, and none of the propositions that have ever been 
 put up to the people have been as attractive as this would be. having in mind 
 the very low cost at which we could secure power. I agree with Senator Evans 
 as to tin 1 sp'rit of cooperation among the cities. There has been a great deal 
 of talk about how the matter would be handled, and the consensus of opinion 
 lias been that, perhaps, cities like Los Angeles and Riverside, which are pre- 
 pared to take it a little more rapidly than the other cities, and which are 
 financially in a stronger position, would take the lead. I am sure, however, 
 that they will be very glad to reserve any benefit to the other cities that is 
 fair and proper, and I believe that it would be a good suggestion to provide 
 that the Secretary of the Interior may attach proper conditions to any permirs 
 issued, so that they would have to allot it fairly. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. Is it your view that if the Government should build Hie Houlder 
 Canon Dam ar a cost of about $40.000,000. and. in addition, distributing lines, 
 or a main distributing line for a certain distance, to cost another considerable 
 sum. it should be repaid for the full amount of the construction charge and 
 for the maintenance and upkeep cost, with a reasonable rate of interest upon 
 the outlay from the time the work began? 
 
 Mr. CAKH. Yes. sir: I do not see any reason why that should nor be done. 
 
 Mr. KAKKR. Do you think that your people would be willing to meet those 
 conditions? 
 
 Mr. CARR. Yes, sir: we are ready to do business upon the same basis that 
 private companies are. and pay interest during the construction period. That 
 would be perfectly satisfactory. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And that would be satisfactory to the people of Riverside? 
 
 Mr. EVANS. Yes, sir.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER HAS IX. 115 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Do you think that is about the attitude of the people of Southern 
 California generally? 
 
 Mr. CAKR. Yes. sir; I think so. The power would be so cheap that they could 
 well afford to do it. I do not think you will have a bit of difficulty in disposing 
 of the power, and I think there will be quite acute competition to secure it. 
 We might need to see that the rules governing the distribution of the power 
 are fair, so that every section may have a fair chance. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. Leaving out for the present any question of benefits in the way 
 of flood control or in the way of irrigation, and looking at it solely from the 
 point of view of generating electric power at the Boulder Canyon Dam. your view 
 is that the entire 600,000 horsepower that can be generated by this dam would 
 be readily taken up by the people of Southern California, and you think that 
 they would be willing as they must be, of course to allocate it among the 
 cities in an equitable way? 
 Mr. CAKR. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And that, as a matter of power alone, you people would be 
 willing to build the dam, but you have not the ready money and can not arrange 
 <m organization to do it. and, therefore, you think that the Government should 
 do it for the reasons named, and that the Government should get back within a 
 reasonable time the money invested, with a reasonable rate of interest. 
 Mr. CARR. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And that it would at the same time maintain a perpetual bar 
 against floods, and also provide a supply of water for 2,000,000 acres of land? 
 
 Mr. CARR. I will answer that question yes, with one exception, and that is 
 that the cities of Southern California are financially able and would be glad 
 to build the dam if it were proper to do so. I do not think it would be proper. 
 There are too many conflicting interests. There will be conflicts as between 
 the users of water and power, there being also involved the question of flood 
 control and irrigation. I think that such conflicts would arise, and that it 
 would be inadvisable to allow any city. State, or private corporation to build 
 the dam. I think that the Government of the United States is the only agency 
 that can properly do it, having in mind the general public interest. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I did not quite intend by the expression I used to mean able 
 in that sense, but I meant able by virtute of .the legal complications that might 
 arisi. and if the Government built it it would be in shape to allocate the power 
 to those people who are financially able, ready, and anxious to buy the power 
 and pay the price for it. 
 
 Mr. CAUK. They are tremendously anxious to get a fair share of that power, 
 and I would answer your question yes. with the qualifications I have made. 
 
 Mr. HAYUEX. I have a letter from the State water commissioner of the State 
 of Arizona, who objects to section 5 of this bill for somewhat the same reason 
 you have given. Mr. Norvill states: 
 
 " Section f> of the bill is a grant to the Secretary of the Interior to allow the 
 purchase of property in the State of Arizona by such political subdivisions " 
 
 That would mean counties and cities in California 
 
 ' that shall have been allocated rights for the generation of power. This, 
 of course, has particular reference to the city of Los Angeles, Imperial Valley, 
 and other cities in southern California and the State of California, and it does 
 not appear to me that either the State of California or any political subdivision 
 of the State of California should be permitted to purchase and own property 
 that might be determined to be real property, of the character referred to, in 
 the State of Arizona in perpetuity, and. therefore. I object to section 5 in its 
 1 1 resent form. 
 
 "I realize that if the Boulder Canyon dam were constructed at the present 
 time it would be necessary to allow a portion at least of the power to go to 
 California points, as well as Nevada and I'tah. because there would not be a 
 market for all the power that could be produced there within the State of 
 Arizona, and I see no objection in that : but to allow Los Angeles, for instance. 
 to come into the State of Arizona and purchase the power plant and lands 
 necessary in its operation, or the dam and plant to hold in perpetuity. I think 
 is going tp!0 far. There should be a time limit on any possessory right owned, 
 by outside political subdivisions, at the termination of which either the Gov- 
 ernment of The Tinted States or the State of Arizona should have the right 
 to take over the property and rights attached thereto." 
 
 It appears from this letter that the same thought is in the minds of the 
 people of Arizona as'that which you have expressed here, that if the Boulder 
 Canyon Dam is built by the Government of the United States this bill should
 
 116 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 make it perfectly plain that only the Government should have any right in per- 
 petuity in it. 
 
 Mr. GARB. My observation is that States and cities frequently get into appar- 
 ently very heated controversies, but when they sit down around the table and 
 talk it over they have no particular difficulty in adjusting their controversies 
 and they get along pretty well. That has been our experience. We have our 
 local fights, but we always adjust them very nicely, and I have no doubt that 
 could be done in this instance. There, is no doubt in my mind but what Arizona. 
 Nevada, and all the other States should be very fully protected. I do think 
 there is an absolute community of intei-est there and when the whole matter 
 is talked over and adjusted by the Secretary of the Interior I do not believe 
 you will find anything remaining to be adjusted as between Arizona or any of 
 the other communities and our people. I think you people will want to be 
 more than fair with us and our people will want to be fair with the other 
 communities. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Mr. Hayden's question and your answer do not intend to leave 
 the impression with the committee, which would go to the House, that this 
 dam or any part of it would be turned over, or any interest in it, in perpetuity 
 to anyone. 
 
 Mr. CARR. No; the bill specifically provides that title to the dam shall always, 
 remain in the Federal Government. He is talking and I had that in mind in 
 answering with regard to the power plant. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Well, the Government would own the power plant, which would 
 be a part of the dam. They would all be connected together? 
 
 Mr. CARR. Yes and no. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Just a moment. Because of this diversity of interest in the sev- 
 eral States the Government ought to retain full control so as at all times not 
 only now but in the future to properly allocate that power to the various 
 interests and so they would all get a fair deal. 
 
 Mr. CARR. I think the Government could retain control so as to see that there 
 is a fair allotment to the respective interests. I agree with you on that. I 
 said yes and no because the. original bill did not contemplate that the Govern- 
 ment should actually build the power plant, while Secretary Fall's suggested 
 scheme does. However, that is a detail the committee will have to work out. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. \Vhat is your view as to the power plant and the main transmis- 
 sion line? 
 
 Mr. CARR. My idea is that it should be left optional with the Secretary, after 
 a full hearing, to decide whether he should build the power plant or not. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Leaving out the transmission line, the Government owns the dam? 
 
 Mr. CARR. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Then why turn over the power plant to individuals? 
 
 Mr. CARR. I think it will be largely a financial question with the Government 
 and one that ought to be worked out by the Secretary of the Interior, taking 
 everything into consideration. I think our idea generally is that they should 
 give him fairly broad discretion in working out the best way. because you 
 can not foresee everything. 
 
 Mr. BARHOTR. The people down there have no objection to the Government 
 retaining possession and ownership. 
 
 Mr. CARR. No. I believe that is purely a matter of detail to be worked out 
 after a full hearing. If you will excuse me. I know Mr. Nickerson can help the 
 committee most, although I dearly love to answer questions. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. This is a big matter, and we did not want you to leave ns too 
 quickly. 
 
 Mr. SixNOTT. The next witness is Doctor Walker, president of the State farm 
 bureau. 
 
 STATEMENT OF DR. W. H. WALKER. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I have been over the Imperial Valley several times and 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT (interposing). Will you state to the committee who yon are and 
 whom you represent? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I am Dr. W. H. Walker, president of the California Farm 
 Bureau Federation and a member of the executive committee of the American 
 Farm Bureau Federation. I am here representing the California farmers. 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT. Where do you reside? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I am a resident of Willows. Calif., nd my office is in 
 Berkeley.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 117 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How long have you been in this work? 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKK. Alxnit four years in the farm bureau work. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What was your work before that? 
 Doctor WALKER. Physician. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You were doctoring' agricultural interests? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. No; I was doctoring Senators and Representatives. I have 
 been over this area all over the State and through the Imperial Valley many 
 times. I know of no State on earth where the whole work is up to the man as 
 much as it is in the Imperial Valley. Water is an absolute necessity for the 
 men in that valley in that it becomes very vital to them. 
 
 Now. as to tlie matter of protection : In my opinion the situation they are 
 in right now. and under the conditions they are working. Financial assistance 
 is practically denied them. That is because of the manner in which they are 
 compelled to operate, and they can not develop that country with the handicap 
 they are carrying now. The Federal land bank has denied them credit and 
 the local banks are practically denying credit because of the conditions under 
 which they are working and with this fear hanging over them. 
 
 As to the matter of the danger of silt and that is all in these reports, and I 
 can not but agree with them you will rind a tremendous amount of silt 
 coming in there, even along the irrigating ditches, and it sometimes gets so 
 high as to bank the fields from the roadway as you drive along. That is 
 building up this dam and rendering a danger there. 
 
 As to the matter of objections to the opening of new territory because of 
 the precipitation of increased production, I would like to say that I have heard 
 some people say that there is an overproduction in the country at the present 
 time, but the California Farm Bureau and the American Farm Bureau Federa- 
 tion do not stand for any such statement as that. We are strongly in favor 
 of reclamation and development because we know America is fast approaching 
 the period when it will be an importing Nation on foodstuffs. We have almost 
 reached that point now. and the best authority as to that and I have looked 
 that up is the Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, and. if I may, I will read 
 what he says in that respect : 
 
 "This Nation is rapidly approaching a critical period in her development. 
 She has long been one of the greatest food-producing nations of the world and 
 has also been a large exporter from her abundance. Now. however, she is 
 rapidly approaching the time when she will need all her own production and 
 possibly more. * * * Taking the crop production as a whole, statisticians 
 have figured that we are becoming a food-importing rather than a food-exporting 
 Nation within the period of from 15 to L'5 years. In fact, the situation is worse 
 than that we are to-day importing more food than we are exporting, measured 
 by money value." 
 
 I have heard it stated that the ratio of increase is something like 15 per cent, 
 while our increase of food production runs only about 10 per cent, so that 
 there is about a 5 per cent margin between the two. and we will need this 
 additional land. It must be developed if we are to keep pace in supplying our 
 food and also our raw materials as a Nation, and yet, in face of that fact, some 
 People hold up their hands in horror and say we are about to precipitate condi- 
 tions which will make that worse when, as a matter of fact, it is not over- 
 production that is troubling us. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. That was the argument advanced against the homestead bill. 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKK. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. What particular individual or organization of any im- 
 portance is contending that we do not need more land under cultivation? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I have seen it in magazine articles. I would not say any 
 organization: but we want to go on record, the American Farm Bureau Fed- 
 eration and the California Farm Bureau Federation, as not believing in that 
 theory and we are not working along those lines. 
 
 Mr.' SMITH of Idaho: There is a farm paper published in Springliel 1. Mass.. 
 of which Mr. Herbert Myrick is editor, which argues from that standpoint: 
 in other words, applying the "closed shop" idea to agriculture. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. The legislative representative of the National Grange appeared 
 before the Public Lands Committee and advanced that argument two years 
 ago. 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKK. That which I have quoted is from Dr. E. D. Ball, Assistant 
 Secretary of Agriculture. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Is it not also true that even if there were any merit in the 
 contention that more foodstuffs are being produced in the United States than
 
 118 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 are necessary, that the character of crops grown in California, and particu- 
 larly in the Imperial Valley, are such that they do not directly compete with 
 the communities in the East where that argument is advanced? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Not so much. That section of the country would not com- 
 pete with the corn belt, and yet I have gone into the Imperial Valley and made 
 contracts for grain deliveries under our cooperative marketing down there 
 and we got considerable grain. But, of course, there are other products 
 which would not compete, such as vegetables, lettuce, melons, and such as that. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKN. Crops which can not be grown in other parts of the United 
 States at the season of the year during which they are produced in the Im- 
 perial Valley? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I was in Portland before the chamber of commerce less than 
 a year ago and the charitable societies there had 600 families on their hands. 
 Afterwards I learned that within three hours' ride of Portland hundreds of 
 carloads of produce were rotting in the fields, and yet they had there hun- 
 dreds of families in need. That was not overproduction of food, hut it was 
 inability to distribute and there is where your trouble is. You will find that 
 condition not only in Portland but right here in Washington. 
 
 Mr. RAKKI:. Doctor, in your connection with the American Farm P.ureau and 
 the California Farm Bureau during the last four years have you had an op- 
 portunity to make a study and investigation of agricultural production in the 
 United States? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Well, in a general way. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. From that observation, taking the development of the Imperial 
 Valley under this irrigation scheme, the land in Arizona and the general idea 
 of reclaiming this arid land, would that mean an overproduction of farm prod- 
 ucts in the United States? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Not at all : I do not consider it would at all. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. According to your view would the production in these Western 
 and Southwestern States in any way interfere with or be detrimental to the 
 farmers of Kansas, Iowa. Illinois, and Indiana? 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I do not think so. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That argument has been made, not only before the Public Lands 
 Committee but before this committee. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Speaking for California alone, we do not raise enough pork 
 to supply California, we do not raise enough wheat to supply California, and we 
 do not raise enough barley to supply California : we ship it in, although there 
 is an export type of barley that we do export. So that of the grains that affect 
 the Middle West, there is demand for them right there in California, a demand 
 for more than we are producing at the present time. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Is it not true that about 60 per cent of the farmers of 
 the country simply raise sufficient products for their own use and do not enter 
 the markets very extensively? I know that was true in eastern Ohio, where I 
 was reared. The farmers did not have much to sell; they raised enough for 
 their families and sold only enough to buy some sugar, coffee, and a few clothes, 
 and it seems to me we ought to look to the interests of the great mass of the 
 people who want a home on the soil and only can raise enough to sustain them- 
 selves and raise their families as well as to those who farm for the purpose of 
 getting rich. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Of course, all farmers have to sell something in order to get 
 other necessaries and they sell it in the form of some food. But if we should 
 go into that and I should attempt to tell you what has happened to fanners 
 in the last four years it would make you weep their inability to dispose of 
 their products at a reasonable figure. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. The farmers who are embarrassed financially are the 
 large producers who have invested large capital and have to raise a great deal 
 and get a good price for it. The ordinary farmer on the hillside has not had 
 such a hard time, because he has his cows, his pigs, and his sheep, and he is not 
 financially embarrassed TO an unusual extent. Of course, you folks out in Cali- 
 fornia may not know about the small farmers, but there are a great many of 
 them throughout the United States, and there should be land made available 
 for a million more. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I know of many small farmers that that picture does not fit. 
 as far as that is concerned. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Just a moment. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. This is going to take us pretty far afield.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 119 
 
 Mr. RAKKK. Not this question. This question is right square and will hit the 
 bull's-eye. 
 
 My colleague from Idaho suggests that the small farmer raises no more than 
 is necessary for his existence; hut is it not necessary for him to raise wheat, 
 harley, chickens, and other things to sell so that the men in the city may get 
 something to live on? 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKR. Yes; I should say that it was necessary to do that. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. And that is why we are trying to advance the fanner, so that he 
 can raise enough for himself and his family and also something to sell in order 
 to supply these necessaries to the man living in the city. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. I agree with you on that. Now, right on the line of over- 
 production : We have reached the peak of production in the United States, and 
 unless we farm very carefully and conserve our resources and apply more fer- 
 tilizers we are going to slide hackward more and more. We have developed all 
 of the virgin territory, and this area not only needs fertilizers but it needs 
 electrical power. An electrical journal published in California the National 
 Electrical Journal, I think is its title states that California uses more power 
 for electrical purposes in agriculture than all of the rest of the United States 
 put together, and we have a tremendous power problem facing us. 
 
 You people talk about 000,000 horsepower and get scared over it, but 
 I would like you to know that right at the present time in California 
 the power companies, upon which they are asking an 8 per cent guaranty on 
 their capital investn.'ent, are asking the railroad commission, which is their 
 carolling body, to allow them to develop $900,000.000 for electricity that is 
 needed immediately and enough to make it $1,600,000,000 for the electricity 
 that will be needed in the next 10 years that is, as they say, to take care of 
 the demands of California in the next 10 years; so that the power that will be 
 developed at the Boulder Canyon Dam will be more than consumed before you 
 are ready lo sell it. 
 
 Mr. RAKKI;. That statement, in a more or less degree, would apply to Oregon. 
 \Vasliington. Nevada. Utah. Arizona, and all of those Western States? 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKR. Absolutely, because in any one of those places by pumping, 
 for example, you could put the lands under irrigation, and wherever you can 
 raise sage brush and can put water on the land you can raise fine crops. 
 
 Mr. RAKKK. Would that development in any wise interfere with or be detri- 
 mental to the United States so far as the Middle West is concerned? 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKH. Not at all, but it would be a help, in my opinion. Further 
 taking up that ]wint, the absolute necessity of more agricultural power and 
 cheaper power, the very existence of some of those places in the Western States 
 depends on it. Cheaper power will also mean cheaper transportation, and that 
 is another thing they depend on, and right along that line we are reaching the 
 stage where we absolutely need that power. It will make our fertilizers. Every- 
 thing that has been said in favor of Muscle Shoals will absolutely apply to the 
 development of electrical power in this region. 
 
 Mr. RAKKR. You mean by that, that by virtue of developing hydroelectric 
 power all through that intermountain region, from the Canadian bonier clear 
 down 10 .Mexico, we will be able to furnish it to the railroads so that they will 
 be able to assist in transporting our products from the West to the East? 
 
 Doctor WAI.KKH. Yes; and it will conserve our oil. All this will be found in 
 this report. We will be able to save many barrels of oil. The Southern 
 1'acilic is burning oil and they could electrify their roads by developing more 
 power, especially where wood and other fuels are scarce. So that the very 
 existence of the people practically depends upon this. I visited the Canadian 
 plant with Sir Adam Reck and T saw how they are using electricity there and 
 I saw how niggardly we are using it. I saw how all of that great possibility 
 was going unchecked and I saw how all of that water from the western part 
 of the Rocky Mountains was going to waste. It is not only going to waste/ 
 but it is endangering the lives of about fifty thousand people in the Imperial 
 Valley. It is a rich valley : it thrills a person to go in there and see what 
 wonderful accomplishments man has been able to make. They have made 
 that country like a garden, and from the standpoint of the safety of those 
 people, from the standpoint of the national policy of increasing production. 
 2ro]i\ the standpoint of increasing the power for fertilizers and for cheaper 
 power I see no argument against this and every argument for it. 
 
 Mr.. RAKKR. We have one other argument ; that they will be able to produce 
 gold, silver and other nrnerals in that country that they can not produce now 
 because of the excessive price of fuel. 
 
 1316 22 PT 3 4
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Doc-tor WALKER. Not only that, hut if you want to open up the chemistry side 
 of it you get into a field that has wonderful possibilities. Cheap aluminum 
 can he furnished there practically at the same time you are making fertilizers 
 and one or the other will pay for the cost of production, so that you will 
 either have fertilizer free or aluminum free. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Have you any other good things? Because, you know, there are a 
 good many opposed to this development in the West, and if you have any other 
 good things let us have them so we can show them to our good colleagues from 
 the East. 
 
 Doctor WALKER. Well, as to your colleagues from the East, I have profound 
 respect' for them, but they ought to go West and see what the possibilities are 
 and unlock some of the possibilities which will make life a little more liveable 
 for the people out in those desert areas; they can do that and at the same 
 time add commercially to the stability of the United States. You take any 
 man in chemistry and let him unlock the possibilities of that country and it 
 is wonderful what can be accomplished. We have all of those minerals and 
 all of those metals. They have not been adequately developed before and if 
 they are fully developed we can make that a more wonderful place than anyone 
 ever dreamed of its being. I think that concludes my statement. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. The next witness is Gray Silver. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. GRAY SILVER, WASHINGTON REPRESENTA- 
 TIVE AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION. 
 
 Mr. SILVER. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, my name is Gray Silver and I 
 represent the American Farm Bureau Federation. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. You are the legislative representative of the American Farm 
 Bureau Federation? 
 
 Mr. SILVER. Yes, sir. Since Doctor Walker has testified just ahead of me and 
 told the story. I scarcely know what there is for me to say other than that, in a 
 general way, the American Farm Bureau Federation is not opposed to projects 
 of this kind, but, on the contrary, thinking not only of food production but of 
 protecting the property and lives of those people who are jeopardized and 
 thinking of the power production for other purposes, they are very much in 
 favor of that kind of development. 
 
 The kind and amount of crops that will be developed by this project will not 
 be so large as to affect the markets, and, in addition, as the doctor has so well 
 told you. we will soon have overtaken our normal production of foodstuffs in 
 this country. It will take some time for a project of this kind to be constructed 
 and some time for the results to be taken to the market, so that in looking ahead 
 it is not at all one of those developments that can be viewed from the point of 
 being harmful to our people. 
 
 The electrical side or the power end of it makes a strong appeal to every 
 farmer and the pledging of public credit for this kind of development is sound, 
 right, and proper, because 80 per cent of the cost of electrical current is in- 
 terest charges. If you develop this power by the method you propose here and 
 pledge public credit on I do not know what the basis may be, but, using Muscle 
 Shoals as an illustration, 4 per cent instead of 8 or 10 per cent, which is the 
 usual cost of money for private development you at once cut the cost of cur- 
 rent in half ; you make a 50 per cent decrease in the sale price by that one 
 move. Then, as you amortize the capital cost you make a much greater re- 
 duction. 
 
 By the amortization method of financing, as proposed in the Muscle Shoals 
 case, you repay all the capital investment and have your power for the cost of 
 maintenance, operation, and depreciation. 
 
 In other words, using the figures which I have on Muscle Shoals, and they 
 apply to this project, east of the Rocky Mountains in this country the per- 
 year horsepower cost of electrical current is about 830 on the basis of all 
 the market will bear; if it is developed on this public-credit basis with the 
 amortization feature, when the amortization is complete it will cost around 
 s~>. That will enable not only the production, where the ore is available, of 
 certain grades of steel by the electrical furnace at about half the present cost 
 of production by the coke-furnace- method, but it will permit, on a very much 
 more economical basis, the fabrication of steel the making of tractors, the 
 making of binders, the making of trucks, and the making of other imple- 
 ments from steel, as well as the fabricating of wood the manufacture of 
 all those things that are made of wood, in which power is a large factor, and
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 121 
 
 while, when you make the cheap electric current, you make all of those things 
 jKissihle you mr.ike more possible the carrying of this current to the farm 
 homes and you take the drudgery out of the farmhomes. If the sale price 
 of the current is made cheap enough the farmers will be justified in buying it. 
 
 Electricity on the farm, sold at a reasonable rate this rate obtained by de- 
 velopment at low interest rates with amortization of capital investment will 
 reorganize a vast number of farm operations, reduce the cost, improve and 
 increase the man power of the farm. Electric motors will furnish water every- 
 where it can be used advantageously ; electric milking machines will relieve the 
 farmer from one of the most trying chores he has to perform. Electric motors 
 will hoist the hay to the mow. grind the feed, thresh the grain, turn the grind- 
 stone, and we may even find eventually that high-powered electricity will be 
 practical in stimulating certain kinds of plant growth. 
 
 Net only will it rejuvenate the farm from the production standpoint, but 
 home life will be reorganized and much of the drudgery removed. Farm home 
 work will become more as it now is in the city. The electric stove, w r ith its 
 automatic control, will do away with the long hours day in and out all the 
 year through. The housewife has had to stand over the hot cookstove. with 
 resulting colds and often followed by ill health, to say nothing of the enforced 
 neglect of children and denial of self-culture and social intercourse and other 
 household duties. With this electric method of cooking, after the food is pre- 
 pared and placed in the stove, the housewife, in addition to having a clean, 
 smokeless kitchen with temperature not above the remainder of the house, has 
 a 'room suitable and comfortable for any domestic purpose. She also has the 
 time of the cooking period at her disposal ; for by this electric method there 
 would be no fires to repair or keep going, so this time can be spent on the 
 children or other household duties, or visiting the neighbors or on Sundays 
 going to church, to come back at the hour previously determined and serve a 
 good meal, well cooked, with all the tedious, burdensome, and difficult details 
 done away with. The housewife will wash the dishes by electricity instead 
 of the old way. which was trial to the women every meal: wash the clothes by 
 electricity and save all the back breaking and hard rubbing over the wash- 
 board and steaming suds; rinse by turning a faucet and wring by turning a 
 lever: iron with the large electric iron or mangle, by which a two days' ironing 
 job is done in two or three hours. All this means so much to the housewife that 
 I can hardly convey to you the full import. 
 
 And so with many other labor-saving devices and much comfort-making equip- 
 ment, all available when cost of electricity is in proper relation with the sale 
 price of farm productions. 
 
 We have lived in the coal age for a number of decades. We are just beginning 
 to emerge into the electrical age. " White coal " is the power of the future. 
 Hydroelectric power is. and probably always will be, cheaper. So economical, 
 necessary, and popular will electric power become that before many decades 
 coal will probably be utilized at the mouth of the mine rather than increasing 
 its cost by expensive transportation. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You mean the farmer will not have to do like you and I used 
 to have to do. get up at about n o'clock in the morninsr and milk the cows in the 
 dark, but they w>ll have electric light to see how to do it? 
 
 Mr. STI.VFR. They will have electric light and electric power to do the milk- 
 ing, instead of using their hands. Most of the dairies in my home section are 
 now operated by electricity. I am not speaking of the small dairies, but of 
 dairies of some size. This electric power will be used to make ice instead of 
 cutting it. and if you ever did it, you know it is not a nice job to cut ice in 
 the wintertime and store it up for the summer. Refrigerators \vill be wired 
 to use electricity and make little cubes of ice as they need them daily, and not 
 try the patience of the women folks awaiting for the men to come and get ice 
 from the ice house. All of these things are not being guessed at. but they are 
 actually being done, and the limiting factor in the use of it is the cost of elec- 
 trical current. 
 
 Mr. HARBOUR. They could heat their houses with it. 
 
 Mr. SILVER. In my home for the past ten years we have cooked wholly by 
 electricity, and it is not an unusual thing in my community. On many farms 
 the cooking is done entirely by electricity. It is a matter of great comfort to 
 the housewife to be able to prepare a meal and cook it on an electric stove. 
 Then, either by setting the switch which turns on the hont at a certain time 
 as may be required or by setting it so that the switch will be thrown off when 
 the proper heating point has been reached, the housewife can go to church,
 
 122 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 if you please, on Sundays, or if it is on a week day she can make a call, know- 
 ing that the meal will be properly cooked with no danger of burning. There 
 is no possibility of burning the food, but the heat is simply turned off auto- 
 matically when the temperature reaches a certain set point which is the proper 
 heat for cooking whatever kind of food is in the stove. The food is cooked in 
 a tireless-cooker compartment alter it has reached the right temperature. 
 Nothing is burned or overcooked and nothing is undercooked. There are many 
 different kinds of things that can be done with this j>ower on the farm. For 
 instance, carrying water is not an attractive job to the boy, and that can be 
 done away with. Those things will be done away with on all the farms where 
 the current can he obtained economically or cheaply enough to enable the farm- 
 ers to take it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You would be able to do away with the noon-hour job for the 
 boy of turning the grindstone, because the grindstone would be turned by elec- 
 tricity, and the boy would be given some rest. 
 
 Mr. SII.VKI:. Yes. sir. Then, think of the railroad situation. Electricity is 
 going to bring cheaper transportation by rail than we have ever had. Has it 
 ever occurred to you that 25 per cent of the freight cars now on the rail- 
 roads would, by using electricity, give the public the same service that loo 
 per cent are giving under present methods v For instance, 800 miles of the 
 Chicago,, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railroad have been electrified, as some of you 
 know, and it has been shown that they carry freight 14 miles per day as against 
 7 miles per day by steam power. Barring the time that would be taken in load- 
 ing and unloading, it would mean that half the number of cars that are now 
 in use would move the same amount of freight if they were electrified. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Why is the movement of trains expedited so greatly when the 
 roads are electrified? 
 
 Mr. SILVER. There are several reasons. One is illustrated by the experience 
 in West Virginia on a bad grade, in going tip the grade to BHietields' and 
 Roanoke, where before electrification took place it was one of the most d'fticult 
 grades to get trains over. A steam engine pulls by jerks, while an electric 
 motor pulls steadily. Before electrification took place, freight trains were so 
 continually breaking down and being pulled in two that they laid a special 
 passenger-train track around those hills so that the passenger trains might pro- 
 ceed. The freight trains almost always had the line blocked. In the eight 
 years since the electrification of that piece of road there has not been a single 
 drawbar head pulled out or a single break in those freight trains. The freight 
 trains have been made even longer on that road, and with exactly the same 
 kind of equipment; but with a different kind of pull, they avoid that difficulty. 
 
 Another consideration is this: The steam engine must be run in every six or 
 eight hours to be looked over by hostlers and caretakers. It must be rested 
 and rejuvenated for the next trip, while the electrical motor will run for -0 
 hours or more without stopping. The electric motor runs in a different way 
 from the steam engine and it is operated in such a way as to give the tra : n 
 added speed and, further, it picks up speed much quicker and stops i] nicker. 
 and, as I have said, it makes fewer stops. That, of course, means more time 
 gained. As I have said, there would be a saving of 50 per cent in the matter 
 of cars because of the saving in time. Then. 25 per cent of the cars. or. to be 
 exact, 23.8 per cent of the cars, now being operated in the freight service are 
 used for hauling coal and other things in connection therewith for the railroads' 
 operations, so that there would be a saving of approximately 25 per cent more 
 in the matter of cars with power carried on wires. The public could get as 
 much service out of 25 per cent of the cars as it now gets out of 100 per cent 
 if the lines were electrified. That, of course, means a great saving. It is 
 so great that I do not know how to estimate it in dollars. It should mean 
 cheaper freight than we have ever yet enjoyed by any kind of transportation 
 facilities. 
 
 I shall not testify any longer, except to say that we are in full sympathy 
 with this development. We are in sympathy with it because we bel'eve that it 
 is sound and logical and we- believe that it is needed. If we do not have a 
 better distribution of food supplies than we have had recently we are undone. 
 We must have improved means of distribution. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. Have you any idea what would be the percentage of re- 
 duction in the cost of transportation that would be made possible by electrifying 
 the railroads? 
 
 Mr. SILVER. I would not know how to give you that estimate. I do not have 
 that estimate.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 123 
 
 Mr. Wn.i.iAAiso.N. How much would it reduce the cost of operation, approxi- 
 mately? 
 
 Mr. SILVER. I do not have that information. You could likely get that from 
 the superpower survey or you could probably get from them sonve interesting 
 statistics on that phase of it. I do not have in mind just what the economies 
 are, but they are very great. For one thing, the labor is less and it involves a 
 simpler process, requiring fewer men. You do not have the same trouble in 
 training men to operate electrical motors that you have in training them to 
 operate steam engines. It is not so long a process and it would avoid labor 
 conflicts to some degree. It is very desirable from every viewpoint, and the 
 argument that we can never find the nvoney to make this development is not 
 well founded because the economies would be such that there would be a great 
 saving in the end. There would not be required anywhere near so much rolling 
 stock as is required at present. However, I believe that these natural re- 
 sources should be developed by pledging the public credit so that the public in 
 that way may maintain its equity in them. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So it is our view that the development of this Boulder Canyon 
 Dam, and other developments along the Colorado River in connection with 
 those seven States in the Southwest, would be developments of as great advan- 
 tage to the people in that section as tbe development of Muscle Shoals would 
 be to the people of the Southern States? 
 
 Mr. SILVER. To my mind it is in the same class. I think it is the sanve kind 
 of development and will he helpful to the whole people. The two projects 
 should be classified alike. The same purposes are served. In the West there 
 is a limitation placed upon production by the amount of water available. It is 
 not a matter of plant food because you have the fertilizing elements in this 
 soil in the West. In the East we put the water over the wheels and take from 
 the air the fertilizing elements required for the soil. They are using natural 
 resources just the same but applying them in a different way. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You think that the Government would be thoroughly justified in 
 entering UJKHI a development work like this? 
 
 Mr. SILVEK. Yes. sir. I think that is the way to make progress in production, 
 distribution, and home making. I thank you, gentlemen, for your attention. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. J. S. NICKERSON, PRESIDENT OF THE 
 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION BOARD. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committe, I represent 
 the Imperial irrigation district, and am sent here for that purpose. We have 
 in that valley 50,000 people, and we have 450,000 acres under cultivation, more 
 or less. I am president of a Mexican company, down in Mexico, as Judge Swing 
 told you, which is a wheel within a wheel. The directors, there being three of 
 us, hold that Mexican stock. We have in the neighborhood of 200,000 acres 
 there under cultivation. Therefore I ought to be able to give you the farmer's 
 side of it fairly well in going over the local conditions there. Now, in Mexico 
 we have 133 miles of main canals to maintain, and of levees we have 75 miles. 
 We have 50 miles of railroad track on those levees that we must keep up and 
 operate. Now, why do we want to change our condition, and why do we want 
 to get out of Mexico and build this all-American canal? In the first place, the 
 cost to the people below the line is $2.50 per acre a year to irrigate, while on 
 the American side the cost is $7 per acre. That is a pretty good reason why 
 we -should want to get out of there. With this new canal we would have 150,000 
 or 200,000 acres of land that would be brought under ciiltivation. That is the 
 largest and best body of land now available in the United States. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. I understood you to say that the cost of irrigation on the 
 Mexican side was $2 per acere, while the cost on the xXmerican side was $7 per 
 acre. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I said the cost was $2.50 an acre on the Mexican side. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. Then it would be to yorir advantage to remain on the 
 Mexican side, would it not? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. That is what it cost them to get their water on the Mexican 
 side, or the actual cost that they pay for water is $2.50 per acre, while it costs 
 the farmers on the American side $7 per acre. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUB. And you take the water through the same canal? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir; we must maintain the canal at the expense of the 
 people on the American side. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Can you tell the committee now just why that condition exists?
 
 124 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON. I can tell you why we want to get out of Mexico. As I have 
 said, there is that difference in the cost of water, or that difference between 
 the cost of water used on the American side and the water used on the Mex- 
 ican side. There is quite a difference in the cost. As I have said, this is the 
 largest and best body of land that is now available in the United States to-day, 
 and we have provided in this bill that the Legion boys shall have a preferential 
 right to that land. They are anxious to get it, and they will get a preferential 
 right to it. 
 
 Mr. LINEBEBGER. By Legion men you mean ex-service men? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You have stated that on the Mexican side the cost of the water 
 was $2.50 per acre per annum, while on the American side the cost was *7 pet- 
 acre per annum. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And it has been stated that they take it out of the same canal and 
 from the same dam. The same dam supplies the water from the river, and it 
 is run in the same ditch. Now, why is it that on the Mexican side they' are 
 obtaining water at a cost of $2.50 per acre per annum while on the American 
 side the cost is $7 per acre? Will you teil the committee why that difference 
 exists? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I will tell you: They pay the same price for water, or they 
 charge the same as we do, but there is a difference in the cost of maintaining 
 the canal. They do not pay for the maintenance of the canal. We have to 
 pay for the water on the American side, and we must pay for the maintenance 
 of the canal. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Why do they not pay their proportionate share of the cost OL 
 maintaining the canals, levees, and railroad? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. In the first place the contract does not specify that they have 
 to do it, and, in the second place, there is no Mexican Government to deal with. 
 During the last year there have been some three or four governors down there, 
 and yon can not hope to do anything with that kind of government. As a mat- 
 ter of fact, there is no head of the Mexican Government, and Mexico is in 
 reality a revolutionary foreign country. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Is it not a fact that they can not be charged any more for water 
 than the Mexican Government will consent for them to be charged? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir; that is the reason why. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. There was a contract between the owners on the Mexican siik- 
 and the owners on the American side? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. There was an old concession of a private company which has 
 been handed down two or three times, and we are the last ones to hold it. Under 
 that contract they were to take all the water they wanted, up to one-half of the 
 water, and there was a price fixed for the water. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And in that agreement you overlooked the fixing of the cost of 
 maintaining the canals, levees, and railroad? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Well, those levees are something that have shown up since 
 that contract was entered into. It has been shown here that the conditions on 
 the river changed so rapidly that no one could keep up with them. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Everybody else here may understand it, and I do not want to be 
 the only one who is dense, but I want that matter clearly explained. Here is 
 water furnished from the same river, diverted by the same dam, taken through 
 the same canals, with the same levees and the same railroad used to maintain 
 the water supply, and I want to know why these Mexican people do not pay 
 their proportionate share of the cost of the maintenance of the canals, levees, 
 and railroads? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Because they do not have to. There is no government there, 
 or there is nobody at the head of the government. I went down there a year 
 ago last February to Mexico City and told them what our condition was 
 down there. They smoothed me down the back in the Mexican way, and said 
 that I was absolutely right about it. They said they thought they should help, 
 and they figured we should have half a million dollars in gold from them. I 
 said to them, " Well, if you will give us $15,000 or $20,000 per month to get the 
 thing started, it would be of great assistance." They did not see any reason why 
 that should not be done, but that was the last I heard of it. I lived in that 
 country for 14 years. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now, tell us why you do not shut the water off from them, as you 
 would on the American side, when they do not pay the>'r proportionate share of 
 the cost of maintaining the canals, levees, and railroad?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 125 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON. I can tell you that very easily : We have to go through their 
 country to get water into our territory, and, as I have said, that is nothing but 
 a revolutionary foreign country. They have no government. 
 
 Mr. BAKBOUR. If you should shut off their water, you would shut off your 
 own? 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. What quantity of land is being irrigated down in that portion of 
 Mexico ? 
 
 .Mr. XICKERSON. It has been stated that there are 150,000 acres, but it is more 
 than that. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Do you know how rapidly additional lands are being taken up? 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON. There is a lot of it. There are at least 25,000 acres a year 
 coming in. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. How long will it be before the Mexican laud will absorb all of 
 the water, and you people will not have any? 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON. They will not absorb all of it, but it is a dangerous proposi- 
 tion, and we are inviting trouble there, because they will establish water rights. 
 At the same time, we are taking our water in there, because we can not help 
 ourselves, but they are arbitrarily establishing water rights by the use of it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If you attempted to shut off the water from the users on the 
 Mexican side, a good many of whom, I presume, are Americans 
 
 Mr. NICKEBSON (interposing). We can not do it. Last year they arbitrarily 
 went to work and put a dam in our main canal, and it was absolutely injurious 
 to us, because it filled the canal up with silt. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Why did you not take the dam out? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It was in Mexico, a. revolutionary foreign country. They 
 have too many soldiers there. 
 
 Mr. SWING. We are subject to the jurisdiction of Mexico so far as that part 
 of the canal is concerned. 
 
 Mr. RAKEB. I wanted Mr. Nickerson to tell the committee why they could 
 not shut off the water. 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Because it would shut our water off. We would dry our- 
 selves ii]) if we did th.it. That would dry us up. 
 
 .Mr. HAKKR. How does it happen that you give them any of this water? 
 
 .Mr. XICKEBSON. That was a private company that had a concession from 
 the Mexican Government. At that time they never figured that there would 
 be much land under cultivation in Mexico, and they had to submit to those 
 conditions in order to get the water in on the American side, because they 
 could not cut through the sand hill without too great expense. 
 
 Mr. SWING. That company was a Mexican company? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. KAKKR. Will you explain to the committee how you will be protected 
 in the matter of your water supply if you make this change? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We will keep it on our side of the line. It was possible to 
 do that, but when it was done, it was not at the Laguna Dam. They came 
 down below Yiuna, and made this diversion, but it was not the place to do 
 it. It should have been made at the Laguna Dam in the first place, but we 
 did not have the money to do it. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Mr. Nickerson, would you prefer to go ahead and make your 
 statement without interruption? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I hear that suggestion a good deal, but in taking testimony 
 like this, we want to get full information. I do not want to interrupt you 
 except to get the facts. 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Gentlemen, I am here to go down on my knees before the 
 committee or to do anything within reason in order to get help for those people. 
 Xow. there is another thing I want to say to you as a reason why we want to 
 get out of there: Our expenses in Mexico from May 1, 1910, to May 1. 1022, 
 were *12.!>:>7.X1S. I have an itemized statement covering every dollar of that 
 expenditure, and will file 't with the committee. Something was said, I 
 believe, about encouraging the use of water in Mexico. We are encouraging 
 that every day this arrangement continues, because those water users will 
 secure water rights. Whether Mexico has any right or not, I do not know 1 , 
 and we are not here to put them out of business. We want them to live and 
 we want them to prosper, but we do not want them to prosi>er at the expense 
 of the people of the United States. They should pay their part of the cost. 
 but they will not pay their part of it. They will never pay it until we get 
 out of there. I do not want you to understand that we wish to put them out
 
 126 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 of business, because we do not. On the contrary, we want to help them, but 
 we do nor want to pay their bills. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What would be the method of taking care of them? 
 
 Mr. NIC KKRSON. We could sell them water. I talked to Secretary Lane in 
 reference to that. He said, " We will not have anything to do with them." I 
 said, " We do not have to sell it to them at a loss." and he said. " No : sell it at 
 a margin." We want a small margin on account of the amount of money that 
 we have spent on levees, canals, etc., for years past. It is practically under 
 their control now. We have no control over it, and we are getting into bad 
 trouble. This Government is getting into trouble by taking water in there. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Has our Government made any effort to adjust this matter so 
 an to protect you people? 
 
 Mr. NKKERSON. No. sir: there is no way to do anything. Our Government 
 has nobody to deal with, because there is no government down there, or you 
 have no recognized government. Some men say we had better take it up with 
 the government down there, but I say there is no government down there. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. There is really no remedy for that condition except by the con- 
 struction of this project. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. That is the only way. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. If you build this all-American canal, you can take out your wa- 
 ter on the American side. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. What would the Mexican landowners do toward paying their 
 proportionate share? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. They would have to stand a proportionate part of the COST. 
 They could take it out of the river, or get it through us. They could get it 
 through us at the Laguna Dam, but I doubt if the Government would consider 
 that arrangement with a foreign country. They would have a certain amount 
 of water. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. As a matter of fact, you have more water coming down the 
 stream than can be used in the Imperial Valley. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. No. sir; not all the time. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. But you would have after you got the dam built? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir: we would have more water than would be needed. 
 J am acquainted with the Arizona side, and there is no more water than \v> 
 will want under the conditions now. There are certain months when we are 
 short of water. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON. But that is due to the lack of storage? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir. There is at least a month when we do not hav 
 enough water there. Our peak is about 7.(KK) second-feet in dry times, but it 
 goes down as low as 2,000 second-feet. The Yuma project and the Imperial 
 Valley do not always have water enough. This is something that will protect 
 the Government, and it will protect the Yuma people on the Arizona side. 
 
 Mr. WILLIAMSON*. You are referring now to the Boulder Canyon Dam? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDF.N. Without the construction of a reservoir on the Colorado River 
 to store the flood waters it would not be worth while to build the ail-American 
 canal? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. No, sir; but there is no company that, could do that. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Furthermore, you can not now obtain credit whereby you couM 
 raise the money to build the all-American canal. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We tried to put out a bond issue but the bond men 
 would not let us put out bonds, because, they said. " You have no storage reser- 
 \oir; you get it and then you can do that." 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN.. Then the construction of a great reservoir on the Colorado 
 River is the real key to the situation? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. It takes care of the whole situation : you can not do any- 
 thing until you do that. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The first thing necessary for the relief of the Imperial Valley 
 is to provide storage for the flood waters? 
 
 Mr. NIOKERSON. Absolutely. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. only when that is done will it be possible to go on with the 
 other development? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. As one of the representatives of the Farm Bureau 
 said, we have no credit. The farm loan bank will not let us have any money. 
 nor will the banks in Los Angeles. The people come to me and say. " For God's 
 sake. Nickerson, if you can get that dam started it will put credit in this val- 
 ley and all over this country so we can live."
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 127 
 
 Mr. LIXKHERGEB. Is it not :i fact also. Mr. Xickerson, that when you were 
 still able to obtain money you had to pay from 2 to 3 per cent more for it 
 than people who were borrowing in other sections of the State, where they did 
 not have this potential menace starring them in the face from year to year? 
 Mr. XICKKIJSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. LIXEBEBGER. You had to pay 10 per cent when people in other sections 
 of the State were paying 7 and 8. did yon not? 
 
 Mr. XICKKRSON. I can explain that to you in a minute. 
 
 Mr. LINEHERGKR. It is ii ot necessary to go 'into details, but that is the pen- 
 alty you have been bearing for years in all of your financial operations, is it 
 not? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Yes. The attorney general and the bond commission in the 
 State of California say, "You have the least bonded indebtedness; you have 
 one of the best districts, but your bonds are selling for less than in any district 
 in the State of California." We have sold them as low as 88 cents, while in 
 other districts they are selling for above par. 
 
 Mr. LINEBEBGER. What did they bear when you sold them at 83? 
 Mr. XICKEKSOX. Five and a half. So you see that is ruinous. I said, 
 " Why?" He said, "Your flood protection, but whenever you take care of that 
 it will be different." I had men tell me that before I left. They said, " We 
 have got to have some more money." but fortunately we are getting along all 
 right. "But," he said, "you must have your storage, your flood protection." 
 I said. " That is absolutely what we are trying to do now through this bill, 
 and I believe we will be able to make the ]>eople back there believe it is neces- 
 sary." 
 
 Mr. HAYDKX. Then your interest in this legislation is. first, flood control 
 above and beyond all other things? 
 Mr. XICKKRSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Second, with the river regulated, it would be possible not only 
 to furnish the lands you now have under cultivation with an adequate supply 
 of water but increase the irrigable area in the Imperial Valley V 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. But you have comparatively little direct interest in the hydro- 
 electric power that can be developed? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Yes. Well, we would need some power, but on this all-Ameri- 
 can canal we produce a lot of power : I think we could produce something like 
 50,000 or 60,000 horsepower through that canal, but the main object, as you say, 
 is storage and then the getting out of Mexico. Xow, as long as you have spoken 
 about power I live more or less in Los Angeles, own property there, and all 
 that, but nobody here has said anything about the possibilities in Arizona. I 
 am an old Arizonian myself and I have a warm place in my heart for the 
 Arizonians. and it is a fact that they are interested as much as we are. Xow, 
 they have a lot of land there; they have the Yuma project, or the Government 
 has, and on which it has si>ent its money and it must be protected. Then there 
 is the mining industry all over the State, and I know all about that. I know 
 of mines laying idle for want of power, and if this power were developed by the 
 Government. Arizona would open up mines- that have laid idle for years. That 
 would put men to work and it would be a revolution in that whole State. There 
 is not anything on our part of it that we want to handle or check; Arizona is 
 entitled to its part of it just the same as we are and we want to give it to them. 
 We have no cards stacked; we want to give everybody all they are entitled to 
 in the way of power and protection. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. Yon are familiar with the Yuma reclamation project? 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Y'es, sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKN. In your opinion is there any real danger that the Colorado Hiver 
 might break the levees, leave its channel and materially injure that project? 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It is absolutely liable to go through the center of it. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEX. And if the river did 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX (interposing). It would absolutely destroy the Yuma project. 
 Mr. BARHorR. What did the Yuma project cost the Government? 
 Mr. HAYDKN. The net cost of construction to date is over *!>.000.0<M). 
 Mr. XICKKRSON. I thought it was about $12,000,000. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKN. So that while Arizona has not heretofore been so greatly inter- 
 ested yet if a break in the Yuma levee occurred and tht> Colorado Uiver changed 
 its channel the injury would be just as real to Arizona as a similar break in the 
 levee would be to California'.'
 
 128 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Absolutely ; and there is no telling when there be a combined 
 fllood in the Colorado and Gila Rivers. Floods have come together in those 
 rivers, and if the floods should ever come there at one time they would im- 
 mediately put the Yuma project off the map and put us off too. Of course, they 
 have the San Carlos project which would take care of the flood waters of the 
 Gila River and they would not then amount to so much. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. At what time of the year are the floods the worst? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. AVell, right now: this is the worst time. If rain comes up 
 in the mountains and wets the snow and ice they all conic down in a rush and 
 there is no power that lives on earth that can take care of them. 
 
 Now, you were speaking about conditions on the Yuma project, in which 
 the Government has its money to-day. Now, then, going back to the levee, we 
 have a second defense on the Volcano Lake Levee that is rotten ; it lias tilled 
 up and we have the water cutting away from there at the present time and if 
 a substantial flood should come that defense would not do vis any good, that 
 is, if the water did break over it. You see, it is tilled up on the inside part of 
 it and below it makes a drop, and if the water broke over that and then made 
 a drop it would immediately cut back. As Judge Swing told yon. it would 
 immediately cut back and clean us off the map. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. May I ask you one question? Taking your knowledge of the 
 Mexican situation and the situation in the United States this being an 
 international stream would you say that the building of the Boulder Canyon 
 Main for the purpose designated would result in the following: The elimi- 
 nation of the canal going through Mexico, the building of the All-American 
 Canal, and the development of electric power at the Boulder Canyon Dam, and 
 that the matter between the two Governments would be in better shape to be 
 adjusted than at the present time? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Absolutely, and protect the Government at the same time. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. There is a call of the House and the committee will 
 have to adjourn. I would like to learn the sense of the committee with ref- 
 erence to another meeting. It is evident that Mr. Nickerson has only partially 
 completed his statement, and several other witnesses are to lie heard. If it 
 is agreeable, we will meet to-morrow morning at half past 10. 
 
 (Thereupon the committee adjourned to meet Saturday, June 24. 1922. at 
 10.30 o'clock a. m. ) 
 
 COMMITTEE ox IRRIGATIOX OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 
 Sat H r^aii. June ^',. 1 ( .\22. 
 
 The committee met at lO.o.l a. m.. Hon. Nicholas .T. Sinnott presiding. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. The committee will come to order. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Mr. Chairman, before Mr. Nickerson resumes his statement I just 
 received in the mail this morning a letter from Secretary Fall containing copies 
 of telegrams received from Bisbee. Ariz., relating to the Girand project, which 
 is located on the Colorado River just above Boulder Canyon and is considered 
 a competitor to that project: also a wire protesting the legislation now before 
 you and an answer to the same, which I think ought to go into the record first 
 as typical of one of the principal objections being made, and an answer to the 
 same. [Reading:! 
 
 JI-XE 23. 1922. 
 
 MY PEAK CONGRESSMAN: I am herewith attaching for your information tele- 
 grams received from the Bisbee Chamber of Commerce protesting against the 
 Swing-Johnson bill and insisting upon granting power license to Girand and 
 associates. 
 
 I am also attaching my telegraphic response to same. 
 
 I am communicating with the Arizona Senators and Representative, as well 
 as Senator Shortridge and the California Representatives, inclosing them copies 
 of this letter and telegrams referred to. 
 Very respectfully. 
 
 ALBERT B. FALL. Secretary. 
 
 Hon. PHIL P. SWING. M. C.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 129 
 
 [Telegram.] 
 
 BISBEE, ARIZ.. June .2.2. V.>.2.2. 
 ALBERT B. FALL. 
 
 Secretary of Interior, Washington, D. C.: 
 
 We, the undersigned, want Arizona to obtain an immediate development of 
 power on the Colorado River. The same is immediately necessary in the 
 reclamation of thousands of acres of land by pumping and also for present 
 industries. The Girand project, No. 121, berore tae Federal Power Commis- 
 sion, will give Arizona that immediate power and also State taxes therefrom, 
 and we urge that the license be issued at once. Objections from southern 
 California to the Girand project have been filed, but upon an erroneous idea 
 that the project will interfere with Boulder Canyon. We as-k that the license 
 issue as provided by law. Having confidence in your fairness, we rely upon 
 your aid in the. matter and respectfully request a reply by wire giving your 
 views. 
 
 BISBEE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 
 
 [Telegram.] 
 
 BISBEE. ARIZ., June 22. 
 ALBERT B. FALL, 
 
 Secretary of Interior, Wash-in utvu. D. C.: 
 
 We. the undersigned, are unalterably opposed to the passage of the Swing- 
 Johnson bill for construction at Boulder Canyon. It discriminates against 
 Arizona by providing for the diversion of waters upon California lands alone 
 and also prevents Arizona from developing any power on the Colorado River 
 either as a State or through private enterprise, but allowing the upper basin 
 States that privilege. We are urging our Representatives to use every honor- 
 able mean? to defeat this measure, and we are cooperating with other organiza- 
 tions toward that end. Having confidence in your fairness, we rely upon your 
 aid in the matter and respectfully request a reply by wire giving your views. 
 
 BISBEE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 
 
 Telegram.] 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THK INTERIOR. Jnm- .2.1. 1U.22. 
 BISREE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. 
 
 Bisbee. Ariz.: 
 
 Receipt your two telegrams 23d acknowledged. Referring your declare;! 
 opposition Swing-Johnson bill construction Boulder Canyon. I can IK t agree 
 that it discriminates against Arizona. Yuma project on the Colorado River 
 is protected and has already cost this Government more than $3.600,000. Ari- 
 zona has been especially favored in the advance of Government funds: also 
 in the amount of more than .S10..1OO.OOO on the Roosevelt-Salt River project, a 
 total of more than $16200.<XK). Returns from public-land sales to close last 
 fiscal year show receipts from Arizona (Lj900,000 or expenditures in excess 
 receipts MH.i per cent. Receipts from public-land sales in California total 
 $7.000.000. and expenditures upon California lands by Government a little more 
 than $3.000.000. or < nly 4."> per cent of receipts. Pending legislation proposes 
 construction dam and development water power by Government of United 
 States and would allow allocation and sale of same anywhere in the State 
 of Arizona, with no preference rights to any portion or district of the State 
 of California over Arizona. Bill does not discriminate as to water power or 
 sales thereof to any ether States as against Arizona. Bill does not propose 
 to prohibit any other construction under the law by Girand or his associates 
 or by the Southern California Kdison Co. or their associates or anyone else. 
 but does give priority rights to the Government of the United States in the 
 hydroelectric development over any private parties whomsoever, whether citi- 
 zens f Arizona. California, or of other States. Under authority act of Con- 
 gress. 1020. I have reported in favor construction by Government Boulder 
 Canyon Dam and participation therein if desired by any States desiring allo- 
 cation of power. This report made under the direction of Congress of the
 
 130 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 United States. As member of the Water Power Commission, I have opposed 
 and must continue to oppose the granting of license to Girand and associates, 
 or any other private parties of power permits on Colorado River, until Con- 
 gress has opportunity to act through adoption Swing-Johnson bill or other 
 legislation. 
 
 Boulder Canyon Dam will prevent or assist in preventing floods destroying 
 Arizona territory and necessity for requests through Arizona Senators and 
 Representatives of gratuity appropriations of public funds for such protection. 
 
 FALL, Secretary. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. Who signed the former telegram there protesting? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Both of them are by the Bishee Chamber of Commerce. 
 
 I also want to file in connection with that at this time, w'thout reading, 
 a report prepared by a former Arizonan, I think at present a citizen of Arizona 
 but who is occupying a position in the Government, in which he shows the 
 tremendous benefits that will flow to the State of Arizona as a result of the 
 development of this project provided for in the legislation now before you. 
 
 I ask permission that this also may go into the record. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Without objection it may go in. 
 
 ( The paper referred to follows : ) 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. 
 
 BUREAU OF MIXES. 
 Wciahhifffon, Jinie L>. !!>.!>. 
 Hon. PHILIP D. SWING, 
 
 Hwtxe of Repre.xcutatire*. W(ixhi)i(i1on. D. C. 
 
 MY DEAR MR. SAVING : You have asked me to give an opinion of the benefits 
 likely to be derived by the mining industry of the Southwest from electric- 
 power development as contemplated under the Colorado River project. 
 The question naturally divides itself into the following considerations : 
 (a) Urgent necessity for protecting established communities such as Yuma 
 and Imperial Valley irrigation distr'cts against flood menace. 
 (6) General industrial benefit to the Southwest, 
 (c) Specific benefit to the mining industry- 
 Mining is to-day, and probably will continue to be for the next decade, the 
 dominant industry of Arizona, southwestern New Mexico, and southern Nevada. 
 The problems of the mining industry in this section may be summed up under 
 three principal heads; transportation, power, living conditions. I will briefly 
 consider these problems in the order named. 
 
 Transportation. The State of Arizona is peculiarly shut in. The nearest 
 ports are Galveston on the east and Los Angeles on the west, with high freight 
 rates from Arizona points to either port, which react unfavorably on the cost 
 of power, the cost of supplies, and on general living conditions. A solution of 
 this problem is seen in the completion of the Tucson. Cornelia, and Gila Bend 
 Railway extension plans from Ajo. the present terminus, to the Gulf of Cali- 
 fornia, a distance of only 97 miles. This would give Arizona a direct freight 
 outlet to the sea. Unfortunately the needs of the mining industry alone do not 
 furnish sufficient urge to capital to undertake this development. 
 
 Power. Mining operations in this section, both large and small, are to-day 
 seriously hampered by the increasing cost of coal, fuel oil, and gasoline; the 
 increase in power costs is a matter of grave concern to the mine operator. 
 Cheap and dependable hydroelectric power will stimulate prospecting and 
 development; it will cheapen metal production in a large territory which dur- 
 ing the year 1918 produced metals to the value of over a quarter of a billion 
 dollars; it will put the small producer on equal terms with the large producer 
 in the matter of power costs ; it will open up possibilities of the electrometal- 
 lurgical treatment of low-grade ores which are at present unavailable on ac- 
 count of high cost of steam or oil, generated electric power, isolation, and 
 other handicaps. 
 
 Living conditions. Living conditions, and particularly the cost of living, 
 are affected largely by the conditions of settlement and of farm development, 
 and by both highway and railroad transportation development. Arizona may 
 be considered as being very sparsely settled which makes for high per 
 capita development cost for public utilities and high maintenance and interest 
 charges. Statistics furnished by the Agricultural Department indicate that 
 less than 5 per cent of the potential tillable land of the State is under culti- 
 vation. The principal requisite for further development and utilization of till-
 
 DEVELOP Ml-; XT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 131 
 
 aide laud is power for pumping water and this calls for abundant, dependable, 
 flexible, and reasonably priced electric power. 
 
 True conservation of the Nation's mineral resources demands that the 
 mineral deposits should be developed and worked with the greatest economy 
 and thoroughness. This can only be done with adequate highway, railroad, and 
 power facilities. Tins in turn demands enormous investments in improvements 
 of a permanent character which will endure long after the mineral deposits 
 are on the wane. It must be remembered that a mine is to he regarded as a 
 wasting asset. Therefore, it is of importance to the mining industry that other 
 indusiries lie developed to fully utilize these transportation and power fa- 
 cilities, and thus maintain the volume of business and commerce of the territory 
 as mineral production declines. 
 
 The Colorado River power project therefore is of vital importance to the 
 mining industry of this section. Not only will it adequately supply the power 
 needs of the mines, but it promises to solve fully ami satisfactorily the other 
 major problems. Many of the large mine operators of the State have a vision 
 of relief to come in the form of an industrial development in the State imme- 
 diately following upon the assurance of the availability of dependable electric 
 power, which development will insure enough freight in the form of valuable 
 raw material such as copper, cotton, rubber, and other agricultural products. 
 to warrant extension of the railroad from Ajo to the Gulf. 
 
 As indicating the stability of the mining industry of the State and the 
 initiative of the mine operators. I may point to the recently completed ex- 
 plosives plant of the Apache Power Co. built by the mine oi>erators to supply 
 the local explosives demand. The next logical progressive step is to refine and 
 fabricate Arizona copper prior to shipment by water. Apparently the two 
 essentials are a satisfactory freight outlet to water and electric power. 
 
 Eliminating from consideration the increasing power demands to be ex- 
 pected from southern California, the principal consumer of power from the 
 Colorado Kiver project would for the immediate future be the mining industry. 
 There is an immediate market at the mines for at least 73.000 electric 
 horsepower, and the demand may be considerably larger. 
 
 In conclusion, I desire to emphasize the conviction that the assurance of 
 such power service will unquestionably launch an industrial development 
 which would react most favorably upon the mining industry in a way difficult 
 to measure in dollars. This indirect help may prove to be fully as important 
 as the more tangible direct help to come from the availability of power for 
 use at the mines. 
 
 Very truly yours, 
 
 F. J. RUI.KY. Art I nil ]>ir>'ct'jf. 
 For H. FOSTER BAIN. Diwtor. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. J. S. NICKERSON, PRESIDENT IMPERIAL 
 VALLEY IRRIGATION DISTRICT. 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSON. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee. I want to 
 call your attention to this river that is shown here [indicating Colorado Uiver 
 on mapl. I'p here is our intake from the river. The banks along there are 
 fairly good and the river is about twelve or fourteen hundred feet wide. Now 
 immediately when it gets down here it divides. 
 
 Mr. KAKKU. Mr. Xickerson, if you would describe what that is and say the 
 direction and give the name, it will read fine in the record but the way you 
 are putting it a person reading it will not get any information at all from it. 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSON. I will say that river is at our headgate, where we take the 
 water out. twelve or fourteen hundred feet wide: then after yon L r et down here 
 about eight to twelve miles, the river begins to spread out and meander, on 
 account of the water when it loses its velocity and volume the silt begins to 
 settle and the water spreads and that causes the river to meander, and our 
 great trouble is from there down here [indicating! because it is up on a ridge. 
 
 Now right here, at this place <>n the Arizona side, the Government levee, the 
 river broke in last year on account of this meandering and widening of the 
 river. That is 17 miles from Yuma on the levee of the Government |" indicating). 
 
 Now we go on farther down here. 
 
 Mr. KAKKK. That is south V 
 
 Mr. NICKKUSON. That is south: we are going south. We i_ r et down here about 
 '2~i miles and there we have cut the river into what is known as Bee River. 
 We have made a cut there that cost sn.'.n.iHM) this year. We have spent on a
 
 132 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 railroad here about $100.000 in order to get it down to this Bee River change. 
 
 Now all this part of it has a tendency to work over in this direction, toward 
 the Imperial Valley, and yon can see from the map here the way the river 
 runs: it meanders from one side to the other because there are no banks and 
 it has no grade and it just runs from one side to the other. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That is north and west? 
 
 .Mi'. XICKERSOX. It runs north and then west. yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. SIXXOTT. Where is the Mexican line there? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Way up here, north. There is the Mexican line (indicating 
 on map]. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. How far is this Bee River from the Mexican boundary line? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. From our boundary line it is about 25 miles t<> where we 
 are making that change in there. There is where we made our tight this 
 year and we have held it so far, but I want to show you gentlemen it is all 
 temporary work we are doing there, fighting for life to get through from one 
 year to the other. 
 
 Mr. HrnsPETH. That is in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Yes, sir. all this money that we have spent we have spent 
 over $12,000.000 in the last four or five years, and I have got itemized state- 
 ments to show that. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. How much money? 
 
 .Mr. XICKERSOX. $12,000,000. I have got an itemized statement that I am 
 going to file with yon showing that. 
 
 Mr. SINXOTT. That is money you have spent in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSOX. Yes. sir : in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. To protect your water supply? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Taking our water through there and buying machinery and 
 dredging canals, and so forth, at the expense of the people on the American 
 side of the line, and the people on the Mexican side just pay for the water 
 but do not pay for the expense, and we have to go down through their country. 
 Xow. you see here is a canal that we run down into their country [indicating]. 
 We run out to here, to Volcano Lake, Black Butte, and then we run back 
 into the United States. We maintain all that and the levee, take care of it 
 and sell them the water at the same price that we sell it on the American 
 side, but they do not pay the maintenance of it ; then we have to tax the people 
 on the American side to make up the deficiency from the water sales, which 
 amounts to $7 per acre per year on the American side, and on the Mexican 
 side it only costs them $2.50. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The levee you speak of is designated on the map as Volcano 
 Lake Levee? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Yes, sir : and we have a canal running right along there 
 and running back into the United States. 
 
 Here is aonther proposition I want to show you. If we take this water 
 through on the American side you can see the length of mileage we will cut 
 out and the amount of evaporation. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. What is the difference in the mileage between the straight 
 one and the Mexican one? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Well, there would be 
 
 Mr. STXNOTT (interposing). Two sides of the triangle against one? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Yes, sir; just about. 
 
 Mr. SINNOTT. Do you know the mileage? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Xot exactly : I do not. We have got 135 miles of canals, 
 main canals through which we deliver this water in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. Do you know the distance of the American caii.-il. what ir 
 would be? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. It is on that paper folder. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. If we build the all-American canal those canals in Mexico 
 will remain, but they will not deliver water across into the United States any 
 more : is that it ? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. That is it. 
 
 Mr. HERKICK. And that will enable you to make those fellows come Through 
 with some maintenance, will it? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Well, we want to give them the water up here [indicating]. 
 We pay for the canals and everything and we don't want to take the water 
 away from them : we do not want to do anything unfair, but we do want 
 them to pay their proportionate part and take the water that belongs to them 
 and take care of it. but not at our expense.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 133 
 
 Mr. HUDSPETH. If you built this all-American canal, Mr. Nickerson, would 
 it be necessary to keep any maintenance on this other canal in Mexico? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. No ; we would not be doing any business there. If they 
 had any water coming to them they could take it right here at the time. And 
 as a staled yesterday, we are carrying water in there and they are develop ng 
 land at the rate of 25,000 acres a year. You are encouraging them to do that 
 and giving them an arbitrary right to the water by using it. 
 
 I just want to show you the conditions that we are facing, and why anyone 
 would object and would not get in and try to remedy it I can't understand. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Supposing the American canal was built; then we still would 
 have this canal running across here marked "Alamo Canal"? 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And also the levee known as the Volcano Lake Levee, coming 
 down here to Volcano Lake? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And then the Solfatara Canal, which irrigates land in Lower 
 California on the Mexican side, which could be irrigated by those people and 
 they would be protected from this flood and silt that now comes down. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. The canal is there and we would possibly have to help them 
 some, you know, in controlling the water, but we would not have to carry our 
 water through there and maintain canals and give them 1 free transportation. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What I am getting at is that nobody would be able to say, if 
 they looked at the situation fully, that you would be doing an injustice to any- 
 body ; it would be a help to them as well as an absolute saving of yourselves on 
 the California side. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Well, I would not say it would be a help to them. It would 
 not be a financial help. The Government could say how much water they had 
 coming and give it to them. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If they are just paying for the vahie of the water, irrespective 
 of the maintenance and upkeep and flood control, wouldn't it be an advantage 
 to those people in Mexico as well, if they are entitled to any water? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Sure they would get the benefit of the flood control, which 
 they are holding their hands up now for. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Mr. Nickerson, will those Mexican land owners con- 
 tribute in a financial way to the construction of this Boulder Canyon Reser- 
 voir? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. No. I do not think so, and I do not think the Government 
 would take it. or let them come in as a partner anyway. They would get the 
 benefit of it ; it would increase the value of their land at least $50 an acre, 
 possibly $100. 
 
 Mr. HERRICK. Is this land here worth anything to anybody [Indicating] ? 
 
 Mr. NTCKKKSON. Yes, that is good land if you keep the water off of it. 
 
 Mr. HKRRICK. It is nothing but a swamp now. 
 
 .Mr. HAYDEN. Unless there was adequate storage provided on the Colorado 
 River, even if the ail-American canal was built you would still have to go 
 down into Mexico to maintain the levees? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. To a certain extent. There would not be much, because the 
 flood water would be taken care of. 
 
 Mr. IIAYDKX. You evidently misunderstood my question. I said in case the 
 Boulder Canyon dam, that you advocate, or other storage on the Colorado 
 River was not provided, then the construction of the all-Amcrican canal would 
 merely give the Imperial irrigation district control of the irrigating water 
 but you would still have to negotiate with Mexico every year over the levee 
 problem. The important thing is storage of the flood waters, and the all-Ameri- 
 ca n canal is of secondary importance to your people. 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSON. Storage is first, water second, and power third. That is the 
 way we figure it. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Do you think if they had the all-American canal there 
 would be such a quantity of water go down into Mexico as to make it danger-- 
 ous to Imperial Valley? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The amount of water in the Colorado River at flood stage is 
 so great that the ail-American canal would only take a very small part of 
 it. The flood menace would continue to exist just as it docs now. and that 
 would compel negotiations with Mexico each y<iir regarding the levee. With 
 that as a club the Mexicans could probably force the people in the Imperial 
 Valley to make concessions to them ; bxit if the floods first are controlled 
 then it would not be necessary for the people of the Imperial Valley to go
 
 1,34 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 into Mexico to maintain the levees. If the all-Ameriean canal is built the 
 water for the irrigation of Imperial Valley can be transported entirely 
 through the United States and the Imperial Irrigation District can cut com- 
 pletely loose from Mexico. There would then be no compulsion of any kind 
 on the people of the Imperial Valley to do anything. Rut storage must come 
 tirst. 
 
 Mr. LIXEHERGER. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Hayden one ques- 
 tion, if I may. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I suggest that you let Mr. Nickerson finish, because he has only 
 a little time left, and then we can ask these questions of each other after that. 
 
 Mr. LIXEBERGER. It is very pertinent to the question. 
 
 Mr. SWING. He has only five minutes left. 
 
 Mr. SIXNOTT. Mr. Nickerson. how do you care for your surplus and drain- 
 age water from the all- American canal? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We have the Alamo Canal. We have the Alamo liiver that 
 runs right down through our territory through the Imperial Valley into the 
 Salt on Sea. And they have got a lot of water that runs in there too. irrigat- 
 ing their part of it, waste water that runs in there. 
 
 Mr. Hrusi'KTH. Mr. Xickerson, I do not understand Mr. Hayden's conten- 
 tion. Probably I do not understand the topography of the country there and 
 how that water runs. Now, I have understood that if you construct your 
 American canal we would have nothing to do with Mexico; it would not he 
 necessary to maintain the canal down there. Now, where would you get your 
 overflow from the Mexican side? Does it run back into the United States? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Oh, yes; the overflow if there was any flood water come 
 over our levees it would go right down into the Unite;! States. 
 
 Mr. Hrusi'ETH. I understand now. I did not understand, and I wanted to 
 get that clear. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Now, you were speaking about the canal. 
 
 This canal is shorter, and it opens up a lot of land several thousand acres of 
 land up in there and that will go to the soldier boys. And it will be very 
 valuable land. There is land like that worth $1,000 an acre. I want to say. that 
 is adapted to fruit, grapefruit, and grapes in the valley now. There is very 
 little of that kind of land in the valley, and some of it is worth $1,000 an acre 
 that was put into grapes three years old. 
 
 Rut the flood water is the keynote to the whole situation taking care of the 
 flood water. Mexico will get water just the same. We don't want to take any- 
 thing away from them. As I tell you, it will benetit their land from $")0 to $100 
 an acre. The flood water is the tirst thing. 
 
 Here is our canal [indicating I : here are the headings, concrete headings that 
 we put in there at a cost of from s.~>0.000 to $10O.ooo. They can have them. 
 We have got to go off and leave them. And they can get their water: we do not 
 hinder them in the least in any way. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Suppose you put before the committee the actual situation here 
 with reference to that matter. 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSON. There is Volcano Lake; there is our main protection from the 
 water coming in [indicating!. There are hot mud geysers going up into the air 
 there two or three hundred feet high from this volcanic eruption. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Are those levees on both sides of our canal? 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSOX. Yes, sir: it is built right across them, and it is built out of a 
 very light silt. It is the silt that has settled there, and it doesn't make a good 
 levee. I am a construction man. I have followed that business all my life 
 waterworks, levees, railroads, and everything of that kind and I know what 
 we are talking about. The tirst year they are built they are pretty fair, but as 
 soon as they dry they contract, and then cracks come in them, and the water 
 goes right through them. The soil is so light yon can't make good levees out of 
 it at all. Now, we are subject to that difficulty. 
 
 On the lower side of that levee it is filled up inside about 10 feet. If that 
 
 did break there would be a drop of about 10 feet and it would just start to 
 
 cutting back, and I think I mentioned yesterday it would cut right back up 
 
 through into Yuma and possibly destroy the La gun a Dam. There are lots of 
 
 engineers who think it is possible for it to do that. 
 
 Mr. HTJDSPETH. Where is Yuma? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Up in here f indicating]. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You have been on this levee many times during flood seasons. 
 have you not? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 135 
 
 Mr. SWING. What amount of water Ls there pressing against that levee during 
 the high-water season? How far back have you seen that water V 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It will run clear back to the Arizona line. That will be 20 to 
 25 miles of flood water. It runs in here, and then it gets up to 8 or 10 feet 
 and then it creates a grade and that makes it go south. The grade to the 
 west into Imperial Valley is greater than it is to the south, but after the water 
 gets in and backs up, it goes to the south. 
 
 Mr. SWING. How deep is the water here where it backs up against the canal? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It is 12 to 16 feet deep, and I have seen it go clear over the 
 top of it. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. In ordinary stages of that water where is the main channel of 
 that river, commencing from your intake there and running on down till it 
 strikes the Gulf of Lower California? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It runs down through here and runs against this levee here 
 [indicating], 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Before the levee was there it must have run some place; where 
 did it run? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It ran promiscuously over in this country [indicating]. The 
 old channel is here and then it changed. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Xow you saw it before they put that levee in there, did you not? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. Xo : I did not not that particular part of it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. There was a very small levee there formerly. 3 or 4 feet high. 
 How high is it now? 
 . .Mr. XICKERSON. It is about 15 feet 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You do not quite get my question. Before the Imperial Valley 
 people put this dam in. and their ditch, and before any work was done toward 
 turning water into Imjierial Valley it did not. overflow nor was there any 
 high water: where did the water run, and designate it on the map, if you can. 
 Then I want to ask you a couple of other questions. 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. I went down the old channel here [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Marked on the map "Channel of the Colorado River prior to 
 1908." 
 
 Mr. XICKKRSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Xow, we have got that. What prevents the water from running 
 in the old channel you have up there by the Bee River? 
 
 Mr. XICKEKSON. It is filled up with sand now. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Xow let me ask you this iiuestion the engineers have made 
 statements here, and of course, they ought to know something about it tak- 
 ing the statement of my colleague. Mr. Hayden, if the reservoir is put in at 
 what is the place on the Gila River? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The San Carlos Dam. 
 
 Mr. RAKEI:. Take ibis statement that tluit will hold back the flood waters, 
 and take the statement of the engineers and also of Mr. Hoover that the 
 Boulder Canyon Dam alone will bold the flood water for at least two years and 
 a half, if not three years, will you tell the committee what there is there to 
 prevent, or what there is there that would cause the destruction of the Vol- 
 cano Lake levee and these other works, and why the river could not be con- 
 trolled by putting it back into its old channel? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. There isn't any reason in the world. It can be put back. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. If the flood waters from the (iila and Colorado are controlled 
 and can be controlled by these two dams from one to three years, couldn't the 
 old channel there by the Bee River be easily be put back in the old channel 
 and maintained at very moderate expense? 
 
 Mr. XICKKRSON. Well, it can be maintained where it is easier than it can 
 be put back in the old channel. It could be done, but who is going to pay for it? 
 
 Mr. RAKEU. I am not asking about who is going to pay for it; I am asking 
 if that is not quite possible? 
 
 Mr. XICKERSON. It is possible. You can put that river anywhere after you 
 get the water controlled. I know that San Carlos canal : the dam site is a good 
 one and it ought to be put in. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. If the floods in the river are thus controlled from two to three 
 years, and only the ordinary Hood would come down to the Ynma Dam, what 
 would be your judgment as to The amount of expense that would entail to throw 
 the river down in here [indicating], from where it is a well-defined river, down 
 to a little east of Bee River and come down the old channel? 
 
 1316 22 PT 3 5
 
 136 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. That has grown up with trees as big as your body, all the 
 way down. It would be a big expense to throw it back into the old channel, 
 hut where it. is now it can be easily maintained. There is not much expense. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. You mean where it is now. not if you diverted the channel? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. That is the straightest and most direct route, as I can show 
 you on the map here, right into the Gulf. Now, if you throw it in here, in the 
 old channel [indicating], you have got to go right over that reclamation project. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. When- would it be most feasible to have it? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Right in here [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. That being the case, you would not be affected by virtue of the 
 overflow; that would be avoided. We are talking now about the physical end 
 of it. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. It would be absolutely avoided, because there would not be 
 any water there ; it would be held back in the reservoirs. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Have you explained to the committee how the river was diverted 
 from Bee River into the tributaries at Pescadero? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We put in a rock dam right there [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. And did you make a cut? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We made a cut there that cost $250,000. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What was the nature of that cut? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We built three channels, 300 feet wide, and turned the river 
 into it by damming the Colorado River, driving piles and putting in rocks and 
 making a diversion here [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. How did you ascertain that it was feasible to make the Pes- 
 cadero cut? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. By finding the grade that was in There. 
 
 Mr. HAYI>EN. By making a survey of the country it was found that there 
 was a depression through which, if you diverted the water by a cut. the river 
 would run instead of extending over and against the present levee? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. sir. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. How long do you estimate that it will take for this Pescadero 
 section of the delta to fill up with mud, just as Volcano Lake filled up? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I have asked that question of several engineers and they 
 tell me there isn't a man living that can tell. It might run this year; it might 
 run next year; it might fill up this year. There is no one that can give us 
 any definite statement as to how long it will last. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. How long did it take the river to fill Volcano Lake? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. We have been there ever since the break in 1909. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. In 11 years the river has filled up Volcano Lake about how 
 much? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. About 8 or 10 feet. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Eight or ten feel of silt all over that area, so that now the 
 Volcano Lake section of the country has filled up higher than the Pescadero 
 section ? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Oh, no ; as I said a while ago, this river here is 20 feet 
 higher than that levee than the top of the levee. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Was there a ridge between the Pescadero drainage area and 
 Volcano Lake which you cut through, so that the water could run into the 
 Pescadero ? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. There is no ridge off that way. but there is a ridge where 
 the river has piled up and spread out. Then it breaks round it. But you don't 
 want to get it into your head. I don't think, about throwing it back into this 
 old channel, Mr. Raker, because this is the most direct and best way. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I know; but you said this would affect the Arizona side. Now, 
 there is the old channel that can be used clear down to the Bee River. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Well, it used to run here, you know [indicating]. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yes: it is marked there. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Is not that an engineering problem that this committee 
 can not solve? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I do not think so. Now. it would not touch the Arizona side if 
 the water ran there in ordinary stages when there is no flood. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. If you took the water out there [indicating] it would not 
 hurt anybody, because there would not be much going through there. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. As a matter of fact, the floods in HIP (lila being controlled by the 
 San Carlos Dam, as stated, and in the Colorado by the Boulder Creek Dam, 
 as stated, the ordinary flow of the water that would then remain in the 
 Colorado River below the Yuma Dam could be easily handled and would in
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 137 
 
 no way jeopardize the irrigation of hinds below in cither California or Lower 
 California, and it would cost but little to handle it. 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. Absolutely. Very little. 
 
 Mr. SWING. About this Hood situation, may I ask that you state what, in 
 your opinion, would he the comparison of the catastrophe that would happen 
 to the property and lives of American citizens if the river should break at 
 Volcano Lake levee now, as compared with the break which did occur in 1905. 
 That was a nationally known catastrophe. 
 
 Mr. NICKEHSO.N. We have got $100,000,000 worth of property down there in 
 the valley, and there must be $25,000,000 on the Mexican side. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Would it be greater or less than that of 1905? 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSOX. It would be greater, because there is more property. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Proportionately, bow much greater would it be? 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. Thant it was then? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Yes. 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. I would say twice as great ; probably more. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Then there were 5,000 people in Imperial Valley; now there are 
 50,000 10 times as many people and 10 times as much property. 
 
 How much more water would there be to rush in on the valley if there was 
 a break now than there was then? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. The natural How of the river is probably 150,000 or 200.000; 
 then you have all of this backed up in this lake [indicating] 20 miles wide. 
 
 Mr. SWING. In 1905 you had only the natural flow of the river? 
 
 Mr. XICKKHSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKKK. You are assuming now this country as it exists at the present 
 time, being subject to flood, are you not? 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. Y'es. 
 
 Mr. KAKEK. But if the Hoods of the Colorado and the Crila were controlled, 
 this question that you have now confronting you relative to the breaks as well 
 as to the cost of maintenance and upkeep, would be obliterated. 
 
 Mr. NICKEKSON. Absolutely. It woulud be a very small matter; would not 
 amount to anything at all. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So. on that question of the Alamo Canal and the levee, and this 
 other canal running from Volcano Lake west and north, that could be used at a 
 very moderate expense in upkeep if the Hoods were controlled, and when the 
 flood control is maintained at Boulder Canyon and on the Gila, the question 
 involved relative to the American Canal is a question of the difficulty between 
 the American and the Mexican canals. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. It is not any question of difficulty between them at all : it is 
 simply taking care of our own property and getting out of a revolutionary 
 country. And everybody would receive a beneHt, Judge; the Mexican people 
 would receive a beneHt on account of the floods over their lands being con- 
 trolled. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Now. I want you to draw a distinction. Do not let the facts 
 as they exist govern your answer. If the floods are controlled you have the 
 dams, the ditches, the intakes, and you would not be bothered with these 
 floods? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Absolutely not. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. The silt would be provided for by the dam; therefore you could 
 control and irrigate not only the lands in Mexico but the lands in Colifornia 
 with an ordinary expenditure for maintenance and upkeep. 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. So as a matter of fact the question of the All-American canal, 
 so far as this land is concerned, is a question of difference between the citizens 
 of California and Lower California relative to the payment of the maintenance 
 and upkeep. 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. That is part of it. Now, Mr. Nickerson. will you tell the com- 
 mittee briefly the reason why we must get out of Mexico and give up this situa- 
 tion and get a new intake, resulting from the trouble between the c'tizens of 
 Arizona and the citizens of California? 
 
 Mr. NTCKERSON. I am well acquainted with that. We have to build a weir. 
 a diversion dam in here [indicating] to get the water into our intake on the 
 Colorado River, and the Colorado River is divided between California and 
 Arizona. This diversion backs the water up and it is a menace to the Arizona 
 side. There isn't any question about that, and we have to get down on our
 
 138 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 knees and beg them every year in order to get a weir in there. It is just a year 
 to year proposition, and they are after us all the time saying, " Why don't 
 you do something?" Then we have an injunction hanging over our heads now 
 to stop us, and it may throw us into court most any time, and it' we should have 
 to go into court and be held up there for any length of time it would mean ruin 
 for the Imperial Valley, absolutely. 
 
 Now we have been saying to them, and we have a contract with the Govern- 
 ment to move our heading up to Laguna Dam in that diversion 
 
 Mr. RAKEB (interposing). Before you pass that let us get the facts so that 
 we may know how we are acting and the facts are what you want to give 
 us suppose you put your weir in at your intake now on the Colorado River: 
 when there is an ordinary flow in the river, which means simply enough to 
 irrigate the land below, would or would there not be any question of a hood. 
 so far as the Arizona side was concerned? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Not with an ordinary river, but when the flood comes 
 
 Mr. RAKEB (interposing). I want to eliminate the flood. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Well. yes. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Just a moment now I want to get the facts: I want to get 
 something upon which to act, and I am asking you if. assuming now that the 
 floods are controlled by the Boulder Canyon Dam and the dam in the Gila 
 River; then there will be an ordinary flow at your intake, and that being the 
 case, assuming that to be the fact, the silt being held back by the dam. would 
 there be danger of flooding the Arizona side with the river in the condition thus 
 stated ? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I do not think so. But then we have got to get out of 
 Mexico ; we can't get out of Mexico with it now. We have got to go up the 
 river 20 miles in order to get out with diversion so as to get on higher ground. 
 
 Mr. SWING. There will be no danger of floods in Arizona after th:s Boulder 
 Canyon Dam is built, unless we have to put this weir hack in the river. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. If we raise the elevation of the water, then seepage comes in 
 to bother them. If we raise the elevation they are subject to seepage. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Have you the agreement there which they wanted you to sign? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. SWING. That presents the view of Arizona clearly. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSOX. I will not have time to read hardly any of it, but we have 
 to put up a bond to protect them. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Put it in the record. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. All right. We mave to put up a bond of $500.000 to protect 
 the Yuma Water Users' Association. I have a copy of the contract that they 
 want us to sign this year, and then we have to sign a death warrant besides 
 to get that. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Let that go into the record, will you? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Yes. Then I have also a statement showing comparison 
 of costs of operation in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. RAKEK. Now. assuming that the Boulder Canyon dam is in. with its 
 control of water for two or three years on the Colorado : with the Gila con- 
 trolled by the San Carlos dam ; with the floods controlled and only enough 
 water coming down to irrigate the lands that need irrigation, would there be a 
 raise in the water at the weir above the ordinary level so as to in any way 
 affect either the California or Arizona lands that are now being irrigated? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. On the California side it would not, but it would in Arizona, 
 yes, because they are farming right up near this weir: on our side it is rocky 
 and hills, so we do not irrigate anything there. But that would not do us any 
 good to get down into Mexico. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I want to leave out any question about Mexico and confine the 
 question to the facts, because after that I am going to put another question, 
 hut I am just gett'ng the physical facts now. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. Have I answered that question? 
 
 Mr. RAKER. Yes, you have answered that pretty well now. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I want to ask unanimous consent of the committee to put into 
 the record this agreement prepared by the Yuma County Water Users' Associa- 
 tion, which they have asked the Imperial Valley irrigation district to sign as 
 a condition for diverting water this year from the river. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho (presiding i. Without objection it may go into the 
 record.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 139 
 
 (The papers referred to follow:) 
 Statement xjioi 
 
 ro>i>]i<iri*on of coxfx of operation in Me.rico. 
 period Man 1. 191(1, to Mail 1. 
 
 ;/r'//.s- from 
 
 [Costs, Hanlon heading and valley division in Mexico ; amounts shown are to nearest 
 
 dollar.] 
 
 
 1916 
 
 (May to 
 Decem- 
 ber). 
 
 1917 
 (entire 
 calendar 
 year). 
 
 1918 
 (entire 
 calendar 
 year). 
 
 1919 
 (entire 
 calendar 
 year). 
 
 1920 
 (entire 
 calendar 
 year). 
 
 1921 
 (entire 
 calendar 
 year). 
 
 To Mav 1, 
 1922. 
 
 Orand 
 totals. 
 
 Operating expense*. . 
 Protective work.. 
 
 $389, 779 
 219,281 
 
 $730,2*4 
 170,655 
 
 1785,662 
 
 395,488 
 
 $943, 592 
 545, 958 
 
 $861,190 
 633,020 
 
 $503,309 
 469,640 
 
 $18(1,731 
 123,387 
 
 $4,401,537 
 2, 557, 429 
 
 Additions and better- 
 ments. 
 
 272, OSO 
 
 517, 544 
 
 822, 213 
 
 611,714 
 
 333,140 
 
 633 
 
 3,210 
 
 2, 560, 534 
 
 Equipment pur- 
 chased . . . 
 
 3,995 
 
 186,882 
 
 382, 571 
 
 05, 349 
 
 287, 024 
 
 4,343 
 
 2,308 
 
 932, 472 
 
 Interest and discount 
 on district bonds... 
 Miscellaneous inter- 
 est, etc 
 
 139, 5G3 
 8,930 
 
 350, 2(54 
 26,029 
 
 523,527 
 19,648 
 
 349,310 
 20,874 
 
 336,638 
 60,449 
 
 434,411 
 15,960 
 
 194, 232 
 
 2,333,951 
 151,890 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Totals 
 
 1,033,628 
 
 1.9*7,6JS 
 
 2, 930, 099 
 
 2, 536, 803 
 
 2,511,401 
 
 1,428,296 
 
 509,868 
 
 12,937,813 
 
 Drlagline equipment purchased 1921 was charged to protective work and readjusted 1922, $126,592.06. 
 
 Statement xlioiritnj comparison of costs of operations in 3fr.ri.cft, May 1, 1916. to 
 
 Man ./. l'.>2.>. 
 
 Operation : 
 
 Water distribution $960, 000. 00 
 
 I>redsring, cleaning canals, etc. 
 
 Mexico 1,070,240.00 
 
 Intake Andrade 1. 502, 000. 00 
 
 Miscellaneous, maintenance of levees, canals, and structures. 1.319.297.00 
 
 Total 4. 401, 537. 00 
 
 Additions and betterment*. 
 
 Structures : 
 
 
 Ilockwood <Jt 
 
 si'61.120. 15 
 
 Oil and water tanks_ 
 
 6,0&1.49 
 
 I>rit't boom 
 
 8, 060. 46 
 
 Power. and tele- 
 
 
 phones 
 
 51. 70 
 
 We<t side main 
 
 
 heading _ 
 
 12. S07. 85 
 
 headgate tecolote 
 
 5, 270. 40 
 
 Tort u oso drop 
 
 11.037.15 
 
 Tortuoso wasteway 
 
 
 and trestle 
 
 27, 407. 31 
 
 Alamo waste 
 
 86, 464. 81) 
 
 By-pass gate sharps- 
 
 12,917.51 
 
 Wanllaw check 
 
 :!_'. 928. 66 
 
 Wistaria check 
 
 29. 915. 2s 
 
 K;isj side headgate_ 
 
 55. 965. 95 
 
 Cudahv check 
 
 74.:::. 
 
 Bulkhead. Cudahv 
 
 
 check 
 
 20, 325. 09 
 
 Wistaria wasteway- 
 
 46, 117.30 
 
 Kncina chute 
 
 13,567.40 
 
 l-'.ridges across va- 
 
 
 ricii- canals 
 
 14, 972. 20 
 
 Sharpes heading 
 
 134, 096. 69 
 
 Miscellaneous 
 
 172. 907. 14 
 
 
 1. 076, 763. 13 
 
 Canal system : 
 
 Rockwood intake __ 152.221.79 
 
 ( Vrro Prieto Canal _ 266. r.2'.. 59 
 
 Solfatara 147. 857. 99 
 
 Tecolote cut 215, 869. 88 
 
 Alamo Canal (cut- 
 offs) 158, 948. 72 
 
 Dermara cut 16, 547. 70 
 
 Alamo Canal train- 
 ing _ 158, 125. 82 
 
 Widening Cerro Pri- 
 eto 108, 780. 14 
 
 Alamo Mocho cut 35, 295. 33 
 
 Carrillo cut 88, 2(53. 41 
 
 Alamo Canal levee 
 
 K. S. heading 6, 976. 41 
 
 1,355,416.78 
 
 Buildings : 
 
 Town site and build- 
 ings 
 
 Employees' build- 
 ings, Andrade. and 
 offices; also ware- 
 houses 
 
 Hydrographers' and 
 watchmen's houses 
 
 20, (50:2.34 
 
 63, 938. 90 
 
 16,240.95 
 
 100. 782. 19
 
 140 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Equipment, liny 1. 1916. 1>i Mai/ 1. ?.'..'>. 
 
 Roadway and tracks : 
 
 Air compressor and 
 
 equipment $10. 585. 73 
 
 Locomotives, cars, dredges, 
 
 etc. : 
 
 Locomotives 36, 342. 40 
 
 Dump cars 128, 717. 14 
 
 Spreader 11,094.81 
 
 Monighan dredges 40, 972. 86 
 
 Locomotives, etc. Cout'd. 
 
 Marion dredges *12. noo. no 
 
 Suction dredges 360, 300. 48 
 
 Cranes 37. 358. "-I' 
 
 Miscellaneous 17. 607. 76 
 
 654. 980. 00 
 Quarry, Andrade 27. 571. 90 
 
 IMPERIAL II;JU<;ATIO.N DISTRICT. June 1~>. l!i.l.>. 
 
 Mr. NICKKKSON. The attached agreement for 1022 with the Yuma Connty 
 'Vater Users' Association was received after I had written my letter. Look 
 it over, the board has not taken any action on it yet. 
 
 F. H. MtlvER. 
 AGREEMENT. 
 
 1. This indenture, made this 6th day of June. 1922. between Imperial Irri- 
 gation District, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the 
 laws of the State of California, and doing business in Imperial County. State 
 of California, hereinafter called and referred to as the district, and Yuma 
 County Water Users' Association, a corporation duly organized and existing 
 under the laws of the State of Arizona, and doing business at Yuma, Stare of 
 Arizona, acting for and on behalf of its. and all of its, Constituent members 
 and shareholders; hereinafter called and referred to as the association: \vit- 
 nesseth. 
 
 2. Whereas the district is engaged in the business of appropriating and di- 
 verting irrigation waters from the flow of the Colorado River at a point in 
 said liver known as Hanlon's heading, at. or near, fractional sections tliirtv- 
 five and thirty-six (35 and 36). township sixteen (16) south, range twenty-one 
 (21) east, San Bernardino meridian, in Yuma County. State of Arizona, for 
 the irrigation and reclamation of many hundreds of thousands of acres in Im- 
 perial Valley, Imperial County. State of California, known as Imperial Valley 
 irrigation project ; and 
 
 3. Whereas, in order to secure a sufficient flow of irrigation water to prop- 
 erly irrigate and reclaim said lands, and to prevent the same from returning 
 to their original desert condition, it is now necessary to erect, and temporarily 
 maintain, during low-water periods in said river, a dam, or weir, in said river. 
 at or near said Hanlon's heading : and 
 
 4. Whereas the installation and maintenance of said dam tends to create 
 such a condition in the flow of the waters of said Colorado River as to endan- 
 ger the works of the Yuma project of the United States Reclamation Service, 
 and the lands and property of the association, and its constituent members 
 and shareholders ; and 
 
 5. Whereas the association has granted its permission that ;i weir, or dam. 
 may be constructed and maintained at said point in said river from July 1. 
 1922. until July 1, 1923, subject to certain conditions, provisos, and exceptions 
 hereinafter more fully set forth; and has stipulated and agreed that a certain 
 temporary restraining order heretofore issued out of the Superior Court of the 
 State of Arizona, in case No. 2429. and now in force and effect in said court, 
 wherein the said association and others are plaintiffs, and the said district and 
 others are defendants, restraining and enjoining the district herein from erect- 
 ing and maintaining any weir, or dam, at said point, shall be so modified as to 
 permit the erection and maintenance of a weir, or dam. therein during said 
 last-mentioned period: and not to further prosecute said suit during such period. 
 
 6. Now, therefore, the said district in consideration of the foregoing, does 
 hereby promise, undertake, and agree that, if it becomes necessary for the ac- 
 complishment of said purpose to erect and temporarily maintain a dam. or 
 weir, in and across the Colorado River, at or near said Hanlon's heading, as. 
 hereinbefore described, that it shall construct the same out of brush, without 
 the use of any rock whatsoever, and that said brush shall be erected and main- 
 tained on the top of the crest of the rock dam and weir heretofore erected by 
 the district so as to hold the water at no greater height than is necessary for 
 the diversion of the amount of water actually required for the irrigation of the 
 lands of said district and that said brush wier. or dam, and the materials com-
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 141 
 
 posing the same, shall be held and maintained in place by a system of piling 
 driven through, and erected upon the crest of said rock dam or as near thereto 
 as practicable ; if necessary said system of piling to be used in conjunction 
 with certain guy ropes and ties made fast to certain dolphin anchors erected in 
 said river immediately above said rock dam. the height to which the dam is 
 to be maintained and the extent of said system of piling to be subject to control 
 by the project manager of the Yuma project: and the district further prom- 
 ises, agrees, and undertakes to remove ;ill of said brush dam. or weir, from out 
 of said river on, or prior to. July 1, 1923, and at any other time between said 
 July 1, 1922, and July 1. 1923, that Porter J. Preston, project manager of the 
 Yuma project of the United States Reclamation Service, or William Wisener, 
 president of the association, or Maj. E. D. Ardery, district engineer United 
 States Army, or their successors in office, shall deem the maintenance of said 
 dam to, in any way, endanger any of the works of said Y"uma project, or any 
 of the lands or property of the association, or its shareholders and constituent 
 members, or any land within said Yuma project on either side of said Colorado 
 River ; and the district hereby undertakes and agrees to keep and maintain at, 
 or near, said dam a sufficient amount of explosives to immediately blow out and 
 remove said dam to such an extent as will permit the free flow of the Colorado 
 River to the southward, so that the same will not endanger any of said property. 
 
 7. And the said district further stipulates and agrees, that the permission 
 so given to erect and temporarily ma ntain such a dam. or weir, in the Colorado 
 Riyer at said point, and the permission heretofore given frr the erection and 
 maintenance of dams and weirs across the Colorado R'ver. at. or near, said 
 point, and their erection and maintenance, and the giving, in the future, of 
 permission to erect and maintain such dams and weirs, shall net be taken, held 
 or deemed, nor shall either of them IK- taken, held or deemed, not to be of 
 irreparable injury to the association, its shareholders and constituent mem- 
 bers: and the granting of said permission, and the erection and maintenance 
 of said dams or weirs, shall he without prejudice to the right of the associa- 
 tion, its shareholders and constituent members, to have entered in sa : d su't 
 No. 242!). or any other proceeding, in any ether court of competent jurisdiction, 
 upon due and sufficient evidence, a decree permanently restraining the district 
 from constructing and maintaining such weir, or weirs, or any weir. dam. or 
 dams, across said river. 
 
 8. And the district, in consideration of the premises as hereinbefore set frrth, 
 docs hereby further promise, agree and undertake to pay to the association, 
 its shareholders and constituent members all damages that may result to 
 them, or to either, or any of them, from injury to their person or property 
 because of the erection or maintenance of said brush dam. or weir, or the 
 ma ntenance of the rock base upon which the same shall be constructed as 
 hereinbefore described, and the district further promises, undertakes, and 
 agrees to pay the ass* ( iation its shareholders and constituent members, any 
 and all damages that may result to them, or either of them or any of them, 
 because of the erection or maintenance of the n-maining portions of all. or 
 any. of the nek dams or weirs heretofore placed in said Colorado River at. or 
 near. sa>'d point, including what is known as the Clark Dam or weir. 
 
 9. And it is further stipulated and agreed that the association, or either 
 or any of its constituent members or shareholders, may sue hereunder in their 
 own right, and without joining any < ther party hereto as a party plaintiff; 
 rrori'li'tl. l/dir<T< r. That if more than one of the said shareholders cr constit- 
 uent members should separately sue the district for such damage, all of 
 said actions sc brought in the same court may be consolidated and tried as 
 one action, each plaintiff recovering the amount of damage that he or she 
 shall have suffered, as finally determined by such court. 
 
 10. The district, for and in consideration of said premises, further promises, 
 covenants, and agrees to entirely remove from out of the bed cf (he Colorado 
 River, on or before December :>0. 1923. all. and all parts of any, and all dams 
 and weirs, piles and piling, rock and brush anchors, guys. ties, and all <<ther 
 material whatsoever placed, or caused to lie placed, there'n by the district or 
 its predecessors iii the ownership and < peration of said Imperial Valley irriga- 
 tion projects, at any time whatsoever for the purpose of impeding the How of 
 said river, and raising the height of the waters thereof so that the same would 
 more freely flow into the irrigation canals of the district. < r any of its pred- 
 ecessors, and to the extent that all of the waters >f the Colorado River shall 
 flow as freely to the southward as said waters did flow prior to the placing 
 of any obstructions in the !>o<] therecf by the district, or any of its said pred- 
 ecessors.
 
 142 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 11. It is understood and agreed that the district shall furnish a satisfactory 
 surety bond in the sum of live hundred thousand dollars < s.loo.<KX> > to the 
 United States of America anil the association, as joint and several obligees, 
 to reimburse them for any damage resulting from the erection or maintenance 
 or said dam or weir, and conditioned for the removal of all of said obstruc- 
 tions from said river. It is expressly understood and agreed that in the event 
 of a failure of the district to fully comply with the conditions of paragraph 
 ten (10) that the bond of $500.000 shall be forfeited as liquidated damages 
 and shall not be considered a penalty, but the proceeds thereof shall be used 
 by the association for the removal of the rock, brush, and other obstructions 
 left in the river bed; and that a recovery, or recoveries, on said bond shall 
 not be a bar to any action, or actions, by the association, or its constituent 
 members, or any of them, in- the event that they, or either of them, should 
 be damaged greater because of the district's breach of any of the terms or 
 covenants of this agreement: it being understood and agreed that the district 
 undertakes, promises, and agrees to pay all the damage that may result because 
 of its breach of any, or all, of the terms, conditions, and covenants of this agree- 
 ment, notwithstanding the execution and delivery of any bond, or bonds, or 
 any recovery thereon. And in the event of damage accruing, and said bond 
 becoming exhausted in whole or in part, during the life of this agreement, the 
 district agrees to furnish additional security and assurance so that there will 
 always be during the life of this agreement security against damage to the 
 association in the sum of $500,0oo. 
 
 12. In consideration of the foregoing premises the district hereby agrees 
 to hold the association harmless in the event it may be required or compelled 
 to pay the rent payable on April 1. 1923. and April']. 1024. and April 1. lirjfi, 
 reserved in that certain lease for the term of three years entered into under 
 date of April 1, 1J)22. between Agnes ('. Heineman and husband, and the as- 
 sociation for certain lands lying west of the United States Reclamation Service 
 levee in section 36. T. 16 S., R. 21 E., San Bernardino meridian, in Yuraa 
 County, Ariz., and the district further agrees to hold the association free and 
 harmless from all costs, expense, liability, and damage accruing or resulting 
 to the association because of any lease, license, or permit given or granted, 
 expressly or impliedly. by this instrument, or by assignment of. or subletting 
 under, said lease, or otherwise, by the association to the district for the 
 en ction or maintenance of said temporary dam or weir, or for the erection 
 or maintenance of any structure or structures on said land for the erection 
 or maintenance of said dam or weir. 
 
 18. The district further agrees, as a condition subsequent, to promptly, ami 
 with diligence and in good faith, take such necessary steps as shall be re- 
 quired under the laws of the State of California to procure funds sufficient 
 for the procuring and construction of another heading, and diversion struc- 
 tures with a sufficient aqueduct, on the Colorado River, at Laguna Iam. in 
 accordance with the terms of the contract between the district and the Sec- 
 retary of the Interior dated October i_':$. 1918. In the event of the district 
 failing to comply with the terms of this condition subsequent, the association 
 may. at its option, declare this agreement null and void and revoke all license 
 an ! permits granted hereunder. And in the event of the procuring said 
 funds the said district further covenants and agrees, within three months 
 after the procuring of said funds, to begin in good faith (strikes, injunctions, 
 and acts of God cxcepted.) the construction of the necessary works for the 
 procuring of said other heading and diversion point for taking its irrigating 
 water from the Colorado River, as set forth in this paragraph, and to dili- 
 gently prosecute such construction to completion: otherwise, to pay to the asso- 
 ciation as a penalty the sum of five hundred dollars (8500) per day for each 
 day that there shall be default by the district in complying with the terms 
 and conditions set forth in this paragraph: 1'roriilrd. linirrrrr. That nothing 
 in this paragraph contained shall be deemed, taken, or held as being obliga- 
 tory upon the association to accept said penalty, but that upon such default 
 the association may revoke all permission, license, and leave granted by this 
 contract as a whole; but in no event shall anything in this paragraph con- 
 tained be deemed, taken, or held to be any waiver of the right of the associa- 
 tion, or any of its constituent members or shareholders, to sue for and recover 
 any damage accruing to it, or them, or either of them, because of the breach 
 of any of the terms of this contract; and nothing in this paragraph contained 
 shall be deemed, taken, or held to relieve the district from liability because 
 of the breach of the covenants of this contract: Provided furtJxr. Innrcrer, 
 That nothing herein contained shall be deemed, taken, or held by any court,
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BAS1X. 143 
 
 tribunal, board, bureau, person, or corporation, whether a party to this con- 
 tract or not, as a waiver by the association of its right to sue for an 1 recover, 
 either ar law or in equity, or by other means, the sum of $1.600.000 agreed 
 to be paid by the district to the United States for the use of said Laguna 
 Iam. in accordance with the terms of contract between the said district and 
 the Secretary of the Interior under date of October 23, 1918, but the associa- 
 tion disclaims any right to recover said sum from said district. 
 
 14. It is agreed that during the erection and maintenance of said dam. or 
 weir, the association may employ and retain an inspector, or inspectors, on 
 said work to ascertain and determine if such erection and maintenance is 
 being operated and maintained in accordance with the terms of this agree- 
 ment, and said district agrees to reimburse the association for such reasonable 
 compensation as may be paid by it to such inspectors, not to exceed $24 per 
 diem. And the said project manager, or his successors in office, in person or 
 by subordinates, may at any time- during the life of this agreement enter upon 
 said works or any portion thereof for the purpose of ascertaining if the same, 
 or any portion thereof, are being constructed and maintained in accordance with 
 the terms and conditions of this agreement, and in the event of their being 
 constructed or maintained in violation of said terms or conditions, to assume 
 control and direction of such works and their construction and maintenance, 
 and to operate the same, in whole or in part, as by this agreement prescribed ; 
 provided always that such control, direction, or operation shall not result in 
 denying to the district a sufficient supply of irrigation water for the needs of 
 said* Imperial Valley irrigation project, except in the emergency contemplated 
 and provided for in paragraph 6 hereof. 
 
 15. It is further understood and agreed that should the maintenance of the 
 dam be deemed a menace to the city of Yutna or any of the lands of the Yuma 
 Valley or endanger the same by seepage or flood and its removal be ordered by 
 Project Manager Porter J. Preston. Maj. E. D. Ardery, district engineer, United 
 States Army, or William Wisener. president of the association, or their suc- 
 cessor or successors in office, the district agrees to immediately proceed with 
 the removal of said dam, and should the district refuse to do so. or neglect to 
 act promptly, it is further agreed that Project Manager Porter .1. Preston, or 
 his successor in office, in person or by a representative or representatives ap- 
 pointed by the board of governors, may, at the demand or request of the board 
 of governors of the association, enter upon any portion of the works of said 
 district on either the Arizona or California side of the river and take possession 
 of the same and proceed to assume control and direction of the work of removal 
 of said diversion dam. The district hereby unreservedly agrees to waive, re- 
 linquish, and cancel any and all rights to prevent such action by injunction 
 or any other process of law that might be invoked in the courts of either 
 Arizona or California or the Federal court. 
 
 1<>. It is understood and agreed that owing to the fact that the district is a 
 municipal corporation of the State of California it may be necessary or appro- 
 priate, in the event of the breach of any of the terms or covenants of this agree- 
 ment. for the association to sue hereunder. or under said reimbursement bond, 
 in the State of California, and that such proceedings, if had. will result in addi- 
 tional cost and expense to the association: wherefore the district, in cons'dera- 
 tion thereof and said premises, hereby promises and agrees to pay to the 
 association, in the event of action being brought hereunder, or under said 
 reimbursement bond in the State of California, the sum of one thousand 
 dollars (Sl.oooi to reimburse the association for the additional cost and ex- 
 pense to it of suing in the State of California, and such additional sum for 
 attorney's 1'ees as may be deemed reasonable by the court trying such action. 
 
 In witness whereof the said corporations have, by order of their respective 
 governing bodies, caused these presents to be executed in their respective cor- 
 porate names, by their presidents and secretaries, and aitesied by their seals, 
 the day .-md year first above written, in duplicate. 
 
 IHHICATION I MSTKKT. 
 
 President, 
 
 Attest : -- . 
 
 Seensterp. 
 
 YT.MA CorMY WAIKI: CSKKS' ASSOCIATION-. 
 By - , 
 
 President. 
 
 Attest : -- .
 
 144 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 EL CENTRO. CALIF.. .funr ]>. 1!>?2. 
 Mr. J. S. XICKERSON, 
 
 Congress Hall, W<i*1> in I/ton. 1). C. 
 
 DEAR SIR: In compliance with your request by wire, under date of June 0. 
 you will find inclosed contract entered into with the Yunia County Water 
 Users' Association for the year 1920, copy of the permit issued hy the War 
 Department, and a copy of the bond of *.~>oo.oi i< i to the Yunia association, and 
 also documents concerning the present status of the injunction. 
 
 In my wire I requested that yon advise me if it was necessary to furnish yi-u 
 with copies of these documents for former years. 
 Yours very truly. 
 
 F. H. MclVER. 
 Secrct'tri/ Imperial Irrigation District. 
 
 Whereas by section 10 of an act of Congress approved March 3, 1899, en- 
 titled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preser- 
 vation of certain public works en rivers and harbors, and for other purposes." 
 it is provided that it shall not be lawful to build or commence the building of 
 any wharf. p!er. dolphin, boom. weir, breakwater, bulkhead, jetty, or other 
 structure in any port. r< adstoad. haven, harbor, canal, navigable river, or 
 other water of the United States, outside established harbor lines, or where 
 no harbor lines have been established, except on [dans recommended by the 
 Chief cf Engineers and authorized ^y the Secretary of War; and it shall not 
 be lawful to excavate or till, or in any manner to alter or modify the course, 
 location, condition, or capacity of any port, roadstead. Inn-en, harbor, canal, 
 lake, harbor or refuge, or inclosure within the limits of any breakwater, or of 
 the channel of any navigable water of the United States, unless the work has 
 been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary 
 of War prior to beginning the same ; 
 
 And whereas application has been made to the Secretary of War by the Im- 
 perial irrigation district of California for authority to repair and rebuild its 
 tempcrary diversion dam or weir (originally constructed constncted under 
 authority of War Department permit dated February 1-1, 1917). located in 
 the Colorado River at or near Hanlons Heading, at the site shown on the map 
 hereto attached, and to maintain said structure until July 1. 1921, as recom- 
 mended by the Chief of Engineers : 
 
 Now. therefore, this is to certify that the Secretary of War hereby authorizes 
 the said work of repairing and rebuilding the Imperial irrigation district's 
 temporary diversion dam or weir in the Colorado Ilivnr at or near Hanlons 
 Heading and maintaining the same until July 1. 1921. upon the following 
 conditions : 
 
 1. That it is to be understood that this authority does not give any prop- 
 erty rights either in real estate or material, or any exclusive privileges; and 
 that it does not authorize any injury to private property or invasYn of private 
 rights, or any infringement of Federal. State, or local laws or regulations, nor 
 does it obviate the necessity of obtaining State assent to the work authorized. 
 It merely expresses the assent of the Federal Government s< far as concerns 
 the public rights of navigation. (See Cummings v. Ch'cago, 188 U. S. 41 o. r 
 
 2. That the work shall be subject to the supervision and approval of the 
 district engineer. Engineer Department at Large, in charge of the locality, who 
 may temporarily suspend the work at any time if. in his judgment, the interests 
 of navigation so require. 
 
 3. That if any pipe, wire, or cable is herein authorized, it shall be placed and 
 maintained with a clearance not less than that shown by the profile on the 
 plan attached hereto. 
 
 4. That so fa i 1 as any material is dredged in the prosecution of the work 
 herein authorized it shall be removed evenly, and no large refuse piles shall be 
 left. It shall be deposited tc the satisfaction of the said district engineer and 
 in accordance with his- prior permission or instructions, either on shore above 
 high water or at such dumping ground as may be designated by him. and where 
 he may so require, within or behind a good and substantial bulkhead or bulk- 
 heads, such as will prevent escape of the material into the waterway ; and so 
 far as the pipe, wire, or cable is laid in a trench, the formation of permanent 
 ridges across the bed of the waterway shall be avoided and the back filling shall be
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 145 
 
 so done as not to increase the cost of future dredging for navigation. If the 
 material is to be deposited in the harbor of New York, or in its adjacent or 
 tributary waters, or in Long Island Sound, a permit therefor must be pre- 
 viously obtained from the supervisors of New York Harbor. Army Building, 
 New York City. 
 
 .">. That there shall be no unreasonable interference with navigation by the 
 work herein authorized. 
 
 6. That if inspections or any other operations by the United States are neces- 
 sary in the interests of navigation, all expenses connected therewith shall be 
 borne by the permittee. 
 
 7. That the permittee assumes all responsibility for damages to the work 
 or structure herein authorized and for damage caused by it or by work of 
 the permittee in connection therewith to passing vessels or other craft, and 
 shall not attempt in any way to prevent free use by the public of the area at 
 or adjacent to the work or structure. 
 
 8. That if future opera t "OILS by the United States require an alteration in 
 the position of the structure or work herein authorized or if. in the opinion 
 of the Secretary of War. it shall cause unreasonable obstruction to the free 
 navigation of said water, the permittee will be required, upon due notice from 
 the Secretary of War. to remove or alter the structural work or obstructions 
 caused thereby, without expense to the United States, so as to render naviga- 
 tion reasonably free. easy, and unobstructed: and if. upon the expiration or 
 revocation of this permit, the structure, fill, excavation, or other modification 
 of "the water course hereby authorized shall not be completed, the permittee 
 shall, without expense to the United States and to such an extent and in such 
 time and manner as the Secretary of War may require, remove all or any 
 portion of the uncompleted structure or fill and restore to its former con- 
 dition the navigable capacity of the watercourse. No claim shall be made 
 against the United States on account of any such removal or alteration. 
 
 '.). That if the display of lights and signals on any work hereby authorized 
 is not otherwise provided for by law such lights and signals as may be pre- 
 scribed by the Bureau of Lighthouses, Department of Commerce, shall be in- 
 stalled and maintained by and at the expense of the permittee. 
 
 10. That the permittee shall notify the said district engineer at what time 
 the work will be commenced, and as far in advance of the t ; me of commence- 
 ment as the said district engineer may specify, ami shall also notify him 
 promptly in writing of the commencement of work, suspension of work, if for a 
 period of more than one week, resumption of work, and its completion. 
 
 11. That adequate measures satisfactory to the district engineer shall be 
 taken by the permittee for furnishing him prompt warnings of floods and for 
 maintaining at the site of the said structure material and equipment sufficient 
 for its prompt removal. 
 
 12. That arrangements satisfactory to the Secretary of War shall be con- 
 tinued to dispense as speedily as possible with the necessity for placing diver- 
 sion dams in said river and that the said district shall report in detail to 
 the said district engineer on the 1st and loth days of each month while This 
 authorization continues in force what measures are proposed for that purpose 
 and the progress made thereon. 
 
 13. That unless previously revoked or specifically extended this authorization 
 shall expire July 1, 1921. 
 
 In witness whereof the Chief of Engineers has hereunto set his hand this 
 29th day of May. 1920, and the Secretary of War on the 1st day of June. 1920, 
 the former in token that he has recommended the authorization of the afore- 
 said work by the Secretary of War in accordance with the terms and condi- 
 tions above recited. 
 
 NKWTON P. BAKKR, 
 
 Secret fir}/ of W'ir. 
 LAXSIM; II. BKACH, 
 ^f(ljo| General. Chief of
 
 146 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 WEIR BOXDS. 
 
 A permit issued by the Secretary of War under date of June 30, 1921, for repairing 
 and rebuilding a temporary diversion weir in the Colorado River until July 1, 1922, 
 was laid before the board and ordered placed on file. 
 
 Director Brockman introduced the following preamble and resolution and moved 
 its adoption: 
 
 "Whereas in accordance with a resolution adopted by the board of directors on July 
 6, 1921, the president and secretary of the district executed a cosurety bond with the 
 Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland, the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. and 
 the National Surety Co. for $500,000 to the United States of America and the Yuma 
 County Water Users' Association, as required by the agreement entered into by the 
 Imperial Irrigation District and the Yuma County Water Users' Association under 
 date of June 10, 1920, by which the aforesaid association waives its objection to the 
 rebuilding and maintaining of the weir in the Colorado River for the years 1921 and 
 1922, said bond being in words and figures as follows: 
 
 "'Know all men by these presents, that we, the undersigned Imperial Irrigation 
 District, an irrigation district organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws 
 of the State of California, as principal, and Fidelity & Deposit Co. of Maryland, a 
 corporation organized and existing under and by \irtue of the laws of the State of 
 Maryland and the United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co., a corporation organized 
 and existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Maryland, and National 
 Surety Co.. a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of the laws of 
 the State of New York, as sureties, are held and firmly bound unto the United States 
 of America and Yuma County Water Users' Association, a corporation organized and 
 existing under and by virtue of the laws of the State of Arizona, as obligees, in the 
 penal sum of $500,000, well and truly to be paid to the said obligees and 'or either of 
 them, their successors or assigns, for which payment well and truly to be made we 
 bind ourselves and our successors by these presents. 
 
 ' ' Sealed with our seals this 8th day of July, 1921 . : 
 
 ' ' The condition of the above obligation is such, that 
 
 "Whereas, on the 30th day of June, 1921, the United States of America, acting 
 through the Secretary of War, issued a certain permit to the said Imperial irrigation 
 district for authority to repair and rebuild a temporary diversion dam, or weir, con- 
 structed by the said district across the Colorado River, at or near Hanlons Heading, 
 Calif., under War Department permit dated February 7 14, 1917, and to maintain the 
 same until July 1, 1922, if said permit is not previously revoked or specifically 
 extended; and 
 
 ''Whereas the said Yuma County Water Users' Association has heretofore stipulated 
 that a certain temporary restraining order subsisting in cause No. 2429 in the superior 
 court of Yuma County, State of Arizona, wherein said association and others are plain- 
 tiffs and said district and others are defendants may be so modified as to permit the 
 repairing, rebuilding, and maintaining of said temporary dam or weir during the 
 period beginning July 1, 1920, and ending July 1, 1922 (unless sooner removed during 
 said period because of imminent danger to the lands, works, or property of the United 
 States of America or members of said association in accordance with the provisions 
 contained in paragraph 6 of that certain agreement entered into between said associa- 
 tion and said district as of June 10, 1920), without the same being in violation of said 
 restraining order, and has further stipulated that said cause shall not be further 
 prosecuted during said period : and 
 
 "Whereas it is further provided in said stipulation and in said agreement of June 
 10, 1920, as a condition precedent to its taking effect, that the said district shall give 
 a bond to the United States of America and said association as joint and several 
 obligees in the penal sum of ?500,000, satisfactory to said association, to reimburse the 
 United States and said association and its constituent members for any damage which 
 may result from the repairing, rebuilding, or maintenance of said dam or weir and 
 further conditioned that said district shall, on or before July 1. 1922, entirely remove 
 or cause to be entirely removed any and all parts of said dam or weir and all parts of 
 all other dams and weirs place ! in .--aid river at or near Tianlons Heading by said 
 district or its predecessors in ownership, operation, or maintenance of the Imperial 
 Valley (Imperial County. Calif, i irrigation project, and all piles and piling, rock and 
 brush, anchors, guys and ties, and all other materials whatsoever placed in said river 
 at or near said I'anlons Heading by said district or its said predecessors at any time 
 whatsoever, for the purpose of which had the effect of impeding the flow of said river 
 and raising the height of the waters thereof so that the same would, or did, more 
 freely flow into the irrigation canals of said district or its said predecessors and that 
 such removal shall be to the extent that all the waters of the said river shall at all
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN". 147 
 
 times flow as freely to the southward as said waters did flow prior to the placing of 
 any said obstructions therein by said district or its predecessors and so as not to 
 endanger the property of said association or the property of its constituent members. 
 
 "Now, therefore, if the said Imperial irrigation district shall reimburse the United 
 States of America and Yuma County Water Users' Association and its constituent 
 members for any damage caused by or resulting from the erection or maintenance of 
 said dam or weir, to the lands, works, or property of the United States of America or 
 said association or its constituent members, and shall, on or before July 1, 1922, 
 entirely remove or cause to be entirely removed any and all portions of said dam or 
 weir and other dams and weirs placed in said river at or near said ITanlons Heading, 
 by said district or its predecessors in ownership, operation, or maintenance of the 
 Imperial Valley (Imperial County, Calif. ^ irrigation project, and all piles and piling, 
 rock and brush, anchors, guys and ties, and all materials whatsoever placed in said 
 river at said point by said district or its predecessors, at any time whatsoever, for the 
 purpose of which had the effect of impeding the flow of said river and raising the 
 height of the waters thereof, so that the same would, or did, more freely flow into the 
 irrigation canals of said district, or its said predecessors, and such removal shall be to 
 the extent that all the waters of said river shall at all times flow as freely to the south- 
 ward as said waters did flow prior to the placing of any of said obstructions in said 
 river by said district or its predecessors and so as not to endanger the property of said 
 association or the property of its constituent members, then this obligation shall be 
 null and void; otherwise to be in full force and effect. 
 
 'Suit mav be brought upon this bond by either the United States of America or 
 the Yuma County Water Users' Association, acting either jointly or severally, and 
 successive actions may be brought by either or both of said parties, provided, however, 
 that the Imperial irrigation district must be made a party to any action brought on 
 this bond, by due service of process and the obligation of the Imperial irrigation dis- 
 trict hereunder shall only be limited by the full amount of the aggregate of all judg- 
 ments which may be rendered against it and that the obligation of each of the three 
 sureties herein shall be limited respectively to one-third of the amount of any final 
 judgment or judgments which may be rendered against the Imperial irrigation dis- 
 trict, not exceeding, however, the sum of $166,666.67 for each surety, but nothing 
 herein contained, nor shall any judgment or judgments, recovery, or recoveries 
 hereunder, be deemed taken or held to bar the maintaining of any other action or 
 actions against said district by said association or its constituent members, should it, 
 or they, be damaged in a greater amount than the principal sum of this obligation, as 
 the result of the erection or maintenance of said dam or weir or the maintenance of 
 any said obstructions in said river or failure to entirely remove them or any of them as 
 herein conditioned or as may be agreed between said district and said association. 
 
 "This bond shall be operative to reimburse the obligees herein for any damage 
 resulting to them or either of them from the erection or maintenance of said dam or 
 weir under said permit and said stipulation of whatsoever materials the same may 
 be constructed and notwithstanding that said permit and said stipulation or either 
 of them may be hereafter so modified as to permit said dam or weir to be constructed 
 of different materials than those now contemplated by the principal obligor or the 
 said obligees. 
 
 "There shall be included in and added to any judgment recovered hereunder by 
 said Yuma County Water Users' Association the sum of $1,000 to reimburse the said 
 association for the costs and expenses of recovering such, as well as such additional 
 sum, as attorneys' fees, as may be deemed reasonable by the court trying the action 
 in which said judgment may be recovered, but shall not add to the liability of said 
 sureties or either of them, each of their liability hereunder being limited as herein- 
 before stipulated. 
 
 "IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, 
 "By J. S. NICKERSON, President. 
 
 "Attest: F. H. MC!VER. [SEAL.] 
 
 "FIDELITY & DEPOSIT Co. OF MARYLAND, 
 "By HARRY D. VANDEVEER, 
 
 "Attorney in fact. 
 
 "Attest: W T . M. WALKER, Agent. [SEAL.] 
 
 "[SEAL.] UNITED STATES FIDELITY & GUARANTY Co., 
 
 "By W. H. SCHROEDER, 
 
 "Attorney in fact. 
 
 "[SEAL.] NATIONAL SURETY Co., 
 
 "By OATESBY C. THOM, 
 
 "Attorney in fact.
 
 148 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 "Now, therefore, be it resolved that the action of the President and Secretary in 
 executing and delivering to the United States of America and Yuma County Water 
 Users' Association said bond in the sumjof $500,000 be, and the same is hereby, accepted, 
 approved, ratified, and confirmed." 
 
 The foregoing motion was seconded by Director Rose and prevailed. 
 
 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT, 
 
 Office of Secretary, ss: 
 
 This is to certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution 
 adopted by the board of directors of said district at their regular adjourned meeting 
 on Wednesday, July 6, 1921. 
 
 In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said district this 
 14th day of July, 1921. 
 
 F. H. McIvER, 
 Secretary Imperial Irrigation District. 
 
 AGREEMENT. 
 
 1. This indenture, made this 10th day of June, 1920, between Imperial Irrigation 
 District, a municipal corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the 
 State of California, and doing business in Imperial County. State of California, herein- 
 after called and referred to as the district, and Yuma County Water Users' Association, 
 a corporation duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of Arizonia. and 
 doing business at Yuma, State of Arizona, acting for and on behalf of its, and all of its, 
 constituent members and shareholders; hereinafter called and referred to as the 
 association, Witnesseth: 
 
 2. Whereas the district is engaged in the business of appropriating and diverting 
 irrigation waters from the flow of the Colorado River at a point in said river known as 
 Hanlon's Heading, at or near fractional sections 35 and 36, township 16 south, range 21 
 east, S. B. M., in Yuma County, State of Arizona, for the irrigation and reclamation of 
 many hundreds of thousands of acres in Imperial Valley. Imperial County, State of 
 California, known as Imperial Valley irrigation project: and 
 
 3. Whereas, in order to secure a sufficient flow of irrigation water to properly irrigate 
 and reclaim said lands, and to prevent the same from returning to their original desert 
 condition, it is now necessary to erect, and temporarily maintain, during low-water 
 periods on said river, a dam. or weir, in said river, at or near said Hanlons Heading; and 
 
 4. Whereas the installation and maintenance of said dam tends to create such a 
 condition in the flow of the waters of said Colorado River as to endanger the works of 
 the Yuma project of the United States Reclamation Service, and the lands and prop- 
 erty of the association and its constituent members and shareholders; and 
 
 2. Whereas the association has granted its permission that a weir or dam may be 
 constructed and maintained at said point in said river from July 1, 1920, until July 1, 
 1922. subject to certain conditions, provisos, and exceptions hereinafter more fully 
 set forth; and has stipulated and agreed that a certain temporary restraining order 
 heretofore issued out of the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in case No. 2429, 
 and now in force and effect in said court, wherein the said association and others are 
 plaintiffs and the said district and others are defendants, restraining and enjoining 
 the district herein from erecting and maintaining any weir or dam at said point, shall 
 be so modified as to permit the erection and maintenance of a weir or dam therein 
 during said last-mentioned period, and not to further prosecute said suit during said 
 period. 
 
 6. Now, therefore, the said district, in consideration of the foregoing, does here- 
 by promise, undertake and agree that, it it becomes necessary, for the accom- 
 plishment of said purposes, to erect and temporarily maintain a dam, or weir, in and 
 across the Colorado River, at or near said Hanlons Heading, as hereinbefore described ; 
 that it shall construct the same out of brush, without the use of any rock whatsoever, 
 and that said brush shall be erected and maintained on the top of the crest of the rock 
 dam and weir heretofore erected by the district so as to hold the water at no greater 
 height than is necessary for the diversion of the amount of water actually required 
 for the irrigation of the lands of said district, and that said bruch weir, or dam, and the 
 materials composing the same, shall be held and maintained in place by a system of 
 piling driven through and erected upon the crest of said rock dam or as near thereto as 
 practicable; if necessary said system of piling to be used in conjunction with certain 
 guy ropes and ties made fast to certain dolphin anchors erected in said river immedi- 
 ately above said rock dam; the height to which the dam is to be maintained and the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 149 
 
 extent of said system of piling to be subject to control by the project manager of the 
 Yuma project; and the district further promises, agrees; and undertakes to remove all 
 of said brush dam, or weir, from out of said river on or prior to, July 1. 1922, and at 
 any other time between said July 1, 1920, and July 1, 1922; that W. W. Schlecht, 
 project manager of the Yuma project of the United States Reclamation Service, or 
 A. Y. Greer, president of the association, or Col. F. B. Downing, district engineer 
 United States Army, or their successors in office shall deem the maintenance of said 
 dam to in any way endanger any of the works of said Yuma project, or any of the 
 lands or property of the association, or its shareholders and constituent members, or 
 any land within said Yuma project on either side of said Colorado River; and the 
 district hereby undertakes and agrees to keep and maintain at or near said dam a 
 sufficient amount of explosives to immediately blow out and remove said dam to such 
 an extent as will permit the free flow of the Colorado River to the southward, so that 
 the same will not endanger any of said property. 
 
 7. And the said district further stipulates and agrees that the permission so given to 
 erect and temporarily maintain such a dam or weir in the Colorado River at said point 
 and the permission heretofore given for the erection and maintenance of dams and 
 weirs across the Colorado River at or near said point, and their erection and mainte- 
 nance, and the giving, in the future, of permission to erect and maintain such dams 
 and weirs, shall not be taken, held, or deemed, nor shall either of them be taken, 
 held, or deemed, not to be of irreparable injury to the association, its shareholders and 
 constituent members: and the granting of said permission and the erection and main- 
 tenance of said dams or weirs shall be without prejudice to the right of the association, 
 its shareholders and constituent members, to have entered in said suit No. 2429 or any 
 other proceeding in any other court of competent jurisdiction, upon due and sufficient 
 evidence, a decree permanently restraining the district from constructing and main- 
 taining such weirs or weir or any weir, dam or dams, across said river. 
 
 8. And the district, in consideration of the promises as hereinbefore set forth, does 
 hereby further promise, agree, and undertake to pay to the association, its share- 
 holders and constituent members, all damages that may result to them, or to either 
 of them, from injury to their person or property because of the erection or mainte- 
 nance of said brush dam or weir or the erection and maintenance of the rock base upon 
 which the same shall be constructed as hereinfore described, and the district further 
 promises, undertakes, and agrees to pay the association, its shareholders and constitu- 
 ent members any and all damages that may result to them, or either of them, because 
 of the erection or maintenance of the remaining portions of all or any of the rock dams 
 or weirs heretofore placed in said Colorado River at or near said point, including 
 what is known as the Clark Dam or Weir. 
 
 9. And it is further stipulated and agreed that the association, or either or any of 
 its constituent members or shareholders, may sue hereunder in their own right and 
 without joining any other party hereto as a party plaintiff: Provided, however. That if 
 more than one of the said shareholders or constituent members should separately sue 
 the district for such damage all of said actions so brought in the same court may be 
 consolidated and tried as one action, each plaintiff recovering the amount of damage 
 that he or she shall have suffered, as finally determined by such court. 
 
 10. The district, for and in consideration of said premises, further promises, cove- 
 nants, and agrees to entirely remove from out of the bed of the Colorado River, on or 
 before December 30, 1922, all and all parts of any and all darns and weirs, piles and 
 piling, rock and brush, anchors, guys, ties, and all other material whatsoever placed 
 or caused to be placed therein by the district or its predecessors in the ownership and 
 operation of said Imperial Valley irrigation project at any time whatsoever for the 
 purpose of impeding the flow of said river and raising the height of the waters thereof 
 so that the same would more freely flow into the irrigation canals of the district, or 
 any of its predecessors, and to the extent that all of the waters of the Colorado River 
 shall flow as freely to the southward as said waters did flow prior to the placing of any 
 obstructions in the bed thereof by the district, or any of its said predecessors. 
 
 11. It is understood and agreed that the district shall furnish a satisfactory surety 
 bond in the sum of $500,000 to the United States of America and the association, as 
 joint and several obligees, to reimburse them for any damage resulting from the erec- 
 tion or maintenance of said dam or weir and conditioned for the removal of all of said 
 obstructions from said river: and that a recovery or recoveries on said bond shall not 
 be a bar to any action or actions by the association or its constituent members, or any 
 of them, in the event that they or either of them should be damaged because of the 
 district's breach of any of the terms or covenants of this agreement, it being under- 
 
 I stood and agreed that the district undertakes, promises, and agrees to pay all the 
 
 " damage that may result bee ause of its breach of any, or all, of the terms, conditions, 
 
 and covenants of this agreement, notwithstanding the execution and delivery of any
 
 150 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER I5ASIX. 
 
 bond, or bonds, or any recovery thereon. And in the event of damage accruing, and 
 said bond becoming exhausted in whole or in part, during the life of this agreement, 
 the district agrees to furnish additional security and assurance so that there will 
 always be during the life of this agreement security against damage to the association 
 in the sum of 8500,000. 
 
 12. In consideration of the foregoing premises the district hereby agrees to hold 
 the association harmless in the event it may be required or compelled to pay the rent 
 payable on April 1, 1921, and April 1, 1922, reserved in that certain lease for trie term of 
 three years entered into under date of April 15. 1920, between Agnes C. Heineman and 
 husband and the association for certain lands lying west of the United States Reclama- 
 tion .Service levee in S. 36, T. 16 S. R.. 21 E. S.'B. M.. in Yuma County, Ariz., and the 
 district further agrees to pay to the association on the execution and delivery of this 
 instrument the sum of $2.000, said sum being rent for the last-described tract of land 
 heretofore, on April 1, 1920, paid to said Heineman, and the district further agrees to 
 hold the association free and harmless from all costs, expense, liability, and damage 
 accruing or resulting to the association because of any lease, license, or permit given 
 or granted, expressly or impliedly, by this instrument, or by assignment of, or sub- 
 letting under, said lease, or otherwise by the association to the district for the erection 
 or maintenance of said temporary dam or weir, or for the erection or maintenance of 
 any structure, or structures on said land for the erection or maintenance of said dam or 
 weir. 
 
 13. The district ftirther agrees, as a condition subsequent to promptly and with 
 diligence and in good faith take such necessary steps as shall be required under the 
 laws of the State of California to procure, on or before January 1, 1921, funds sufficient 
 for the procuring and construction of another heading and diversion structures with a 
 sufficient aqueduct on the Colorado River at Laguna Dam. in accordance with the 
 terms of the contract between the district and the Secretary of the Interior dated 
 October 23, 1918. In the event of the district failing to comply with the terms of this 
 condition subsequent, the association may, at its option, declare this agreement null 
 and A'oid and revoke all license and permits granted hereunder. And in the event of 
 the procuring said funds the said district further covenants and agrees within three 
 months after the procuring of said funds to begin in good faith (strikes, injunctions, 
 and acts of God excepted) the construction of the necessary works for the procuring of 
 said other heading and diversion point for taking its irrigating water from the Colorado 
 River, as set forth in this paragraph, and to diligently prosecute such construction to 
 completion; otherwise, to pay to the association as a penalty the sum of $500 pet day 
 for each day that there shall be default by the district in complying with the terms and 
 conditions set forth in this paragraph: Provided, however, That nothing in this para- 
 graph contained shall be deemed, taken, or held as being obligatory upon the association 
 to accept said penalty, but that upon such default the association may revoke all 
 permission license and leave granted by this contract as a whole; but in no event shall 
 anything in this paragraph contained be deemed, taken or held to be any waiver of the 
 right of the association, or any of its constituent members or shareholders, to sue for 
 and recover any damage accruing to it, or them, or either of them, because of the 
 breach of any of the terms of this contract; and nothing 'in this paragraph contained shall 
 be deemed, taken or held to relieve the district from liability because of the breach of 
 the covenants of this contract: Provided further , however, That nothing herein con- 
 tained shall be deemed, taken or held by any court, tribunal, board, bureau, person or 
 corporation, whether a party to this contract or not, as a waiver by the association of 
 its right to sue for and recover, either at law or in equity or by other means, the sum of 
 $1,600,000 agreed to be paid by the district to the United States for the use of said 
 Laguna Dam, in accordance with the terms of contract between the said district and 
 the Secretary of the Interior under date of October 23, 1918, but the association dis- 
 claims any right to recover said sum from said district. 
 
 14. It is agreed that during the erection and maintenance of said dam or weir the 
 association may employ and retain an inspector or inspectors on said work to ascer- 
 tain and determine if such erection and maintenance is being operated and main- 
 tained in accordance with the terms of this agreement, and said district agrees to 
 reimburse the association for such reasonable compensation as may be paid by it to 
 such inspectors, not to exceed $24 per diem. And the said project manager or his 
 successors in office, in person or by subordinates, may at any time during the life of 
 this agreement enter upon said woVks or any portion thereof for the purpose of ascer- 
 taining if the same or any portion thereof are being constructed and maintained in 
 accordance with the terms and conditions of this agreement, and in the event, of their 
 being constructed or maintained in violation of said terms or conditions to assume con- 
 trol and direction of such works and their construction and maintenance and to oper- 
 ate the same, in whole or in part, as by this agreement prescribed, provided always
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 151 
 
 that such control, direction, or operation shall not result in denying lo the district a 
 sufficient supply of irrigation water for the needs of said Imperial Valley irrigation 
 project, except in the emergency contemplated and provided for in paragraph 6 
 hereof. 
 
 15. It is understood and agreed that owing to the fact that the district is a munici- 
 pal corporation of the State of California it may be necessary or appropriate, in the 
 event of the breach of any of the terms or covenants of this agreement, for the asso- 
 ciation to sue hereunder or under said reimbursement bond in the State of California, 
 and that such proceedings, if had. will result in additional cost and expense to the 
 association; wherefore the district, in consideration thereof and said premises, hereby 
 promises and agrees to pay to the association, in the event of action being brought 
 hereunder or under said reimbursement bond in the State of California, the sum of 
 $1,000 to reimburse the association for the additional cost and expense to it of suing 
 in the State of ( alii'ornia and such additional sum for attorney's fees as may be deemed 
 reasonable by the court trying such action. 
 
 In witness whereof the said corporations have, by order of their respective govern- 
 ing bodies, caused these presents to be executed in their respective corporate names 
 by their presidents and secretaries and attested by their seals the day and year first 
 above written, in duplicate. 
 
 IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT. 
 
 YUMA COUNTY WATER USERS' ASSOCIATION. 
 
 STIPULATION. 
 
 jf 
 
 In the Superior Court of Yuma County, State of Arizona. Yuma County Water Users' 
 Association et al., plaintiffs, v. Imperial Irrigation District et al., defendants. 
 It is hereby stipulated by and between the above-entitled parties that the defendant, 
 Imperial Irrigation District, may have to and including the 18th day of June, 1917, 
 in which to prepare, file, and present its objections to the filing of plaintiff's so-called 
 supplemental complaint; and further that the defendant. Imperial Irrigation District, 
 may have to and including the 2d day of July, 1917, in which to prepare, serve, and 
 file its answer to plaintiff's amended complaint; and if defendant's objections to plain- 
 tiffs supplemental complaint are overruled, in part 01 in whole, the defendant. Impe- 
 rial Irrigation District, may have to and including the 25th day of June, 1917. in 
 which to prepare, serve, and file its answer to plaintiffs supplemental complaint. 
 
 The above time is heieby shortened, at the option of attorney for the plaintiff, upon 
 giving the attorney for the defendant, Imperial Irrigation District. 10 days' notice. 
 
 THOS. MOLLOY, 
 Attorney f 01 Plaintiff. 
 PHIL D. SWING, 
 Attorney for Defendant, Imperial Irrigation Distriet. 
 
 MODIFIED RESTRAINING ORDER. 
 
 In the Superior Court, Yuma County, State of Arizona, Yuma County Water User's 
 Association et al., plaintiffs, v. Imperial Irrigation District et al., defendants. 
 
 In the above-entitled action, the parties hereto having agreed to the same, the tem- 
 porary restraining order heretofore issued is hereby modified and made to read as 
 follows: 
 
 On reading the verified amended complaint herein and the stipulation of the parties 
 herein, it is hereby ordered as follows: Upon the defendants giving bond in the sum 
 of s| ()0. 000 for the faithful observance hereof, that the defendants are permitted to 
 construct their proposed dam or weir, but in the construction of the same they are 
 hereby commanded, enjoined, and restrained from using any rock in the construction 
 of the said weir, except such rock as may be loaded upon the cars with the steam 
 shovel now in use by said defendants, or another of similar size, and from using any 
 rock larger in size than one-half of 1 cubic yard ; and they are further commanded to 
 commence the removal of any piles or trestle placed by them in the said river not 
 later than October 1, 191(5. and thereafter to remove the same with diligence, and in 
 all events to remove the same not later than November 1, 1910, and also thereafter 
 to remove the other obstructions placed by the defendants in the said river at the time 
 and in the manner directed by the project engineer of the Yuma project of the United 
 States Reclamation Service, and in any event shall remove the same prior to January 
 1, 1917. 
 
 Done in open court this 3d day of August. 1916. 
 
 BAXTER, Judge of Said Court. 
 1316 22 PT 3 6
 
 152 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 STIPULATION. 
 
 In the Superior Court, Yuma County, State of Arizona. No. 2429. Yuma County 
 
 Water Users' Association et al., v. Imperial Irrigation District et al. 
 
 In the above-entitled action it is hereby stipulated that the temporary restraining 
 order heretofore issued may be modified and made to read as the annexed temporary 
 restraining order. 
 
 It is further stipulated that the defendant, Imperial Irrigation District hereby 
 admits service and summons herein and submits itself to the jurisdiction of said'court, 
 and agrees to herein file its demurrer or answer within 20 days hereafter. 
 
 It is further agreed that the said cause will not be tried until after the 1st day of 
 October, 1916, and that the plaintiffs may. if they see fit, amend their complaint 
 herein so as to ask for the carrying out of this stipulation and the temporary injunction 
 herein, and compel the removal of the obstructions placed in the river by the 
 defendants. 
 
 THOS. D. MOLLOY, 
 Attorney for Plaintiff. 
 
 M. W. CONKIJNG, 
 
 Attorney for Defendants. 
 
 STIPULATION. 
 
 In the Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the county of Yuma, No. 
 2429, Yuma County Water Users' Association et al., plaintiffs, r. Imperial Irriga- 
 tion District et al., defendants. 
 The parties hereto hereby stipulate as follows, to wit: 
 
 1. That the temporary restraining order heretofore issued herein, now in full force 
 and effect as heretofore modified, may be, and the same is hereby, further modified 
 and shall remain in full force and effect, as so remodified, until the further order of 
 this court, as follows, to wit: That the defendants are permitted to erect and con- 
 struct and temporarily maintain across the Colorado River from a point in or near 
 fractional S. 35, T. 16 S., R. 21 E., S. and B. meridian, in Yuma County, State of 
 Arizona, to a point on the California or Mexico side of said river near w T hat is known 
 as Hanlon's heading of the Imperial Valley irrigation project, a brush dam or weir 
 on the crest of what now remains of a rock dam heretofore placed in said river at 
 said point in accordance with the stipulation of the parties hereto, duly filed herein, 
 and in pursuance of the said restrianing order as heretofore modified and in force and 
 effect, and to so repair and rebuild said rock dam, or as near thereto as practicable; 
 and that said brush weir or dam, and the materials composing the same, shall be held 
 and maintained in place by a system of piling driven through and erected upon the 
 cre?t of said rock dam, or as near thereto as practicable, which said system of piling 
 may be in the form of a trestle upon which may be operated a railroad for dumping 
 material other than rock, if necessary said system of piling to be used in conjunction 
 with certain guy ropes and ties made fast to certain dolphin anchors erected in said 
 river immediately above said rock dam: and that said dam shall be constructed 
 without the placing of any rock whatsoever therein, or in connection therewith, and 
 that the same may be kept and maintained by the defendants at said point in said 
 river, from July 1, 1919, until July 1, 1920: Provided, hminrr. If during said period 
 the Colorado River, whether from floods in the Gila River or from other causes, rises 
 to such a height as, in the judgment of W. W. Schlecht, project manager of the Yuma 
 project of the United States Reclamation Service, or his successor in office, to immi- 
 nently endanger the irrigation works of said Yuma project, or any of the property of 
 the Yuma County Water Users' Association or any of its constituent members, or 
 any land or lands within the said Yuma project on either side of said Colorado River, 
 the said defendants shall immediately remove, by adequate means, such as blasting, 
 said dam to the extent that it will permit the free flow of the waters of the Colorado 
 River to the southward, and thus remove all danger to the property above described. 
 
 2. It is further stipulated, as a condition precedent to this stipulation taking effect. 
 that said Imperial Irrigation District shall give a bond to the United States of America 
 and Yuma County Water Users' Association, as joint and several obligees, to reimburse 
 the United States and said association and its constituent members for any damage 
 which may result from the repairing, rebuilding, or maintaining of said dam or weir: 
 and further conditioned that said district shall, on or before April 15. 1921. entirely 
 remove, or cause to be entirely removed, all and all parts of said dam. or weir, and 
 all parts of all other dams and weirs placed in said river at or near said Hanlon's
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 153 
 
 heading by said district, or its predecessors in the ownership, operation, or maintenance 
 of the Imperial Valley (Imperial County. Calif..) irrigation project, and all piles and 
 piling, rock and brush, anchors, guys and ties, and all other materials whatsoever 
 placed in said river at or near said Hanlon's heading by said district, or its said prede- 
 cessors, at any time whatsoever, for the purpose or which had the effect of impeding 
 the flow of said river and raising the height of the waters thereof so that the same would 
 or did more freely flow into the irrigation canals of said district, or its said predecessors. 
 and that such removal shall be to the extent that all the waters of the said river shall 
 . at all times flow a? freely to the southward as said waters did flow prior to the placing 
 of any of said obstructions therein bv said district, or its said predecessors, and o as 
 to not endanger the property of said association or the property of its constituent 
 members. 
 
 3. And it is further stipulated and agreed between the parties hereto, that the 
 granting of the permission by the plaintiffs herein to the defendants herein, to erect 
 and maintain said brush dam. as hereinbefore stipulated for. and the entering into 
 this stipulation, and the modification of said temporary restraining order shall not be 
 admitted as evidence in this, or any other proceeding whatsoever between the parties 
 hereto; and it shall not be taken, held, or deemed that the construction of said weir, 
 or other, or like, weirs in the past or in the future is not. and shall not be. of irreparable 
 injury to the Yuma < 'ounty Water Users' Association, its shareholders and constituent 
 members; and it is further stipulated that the granting of said permission, and the 
 entering into this stipulation, is and shall be without prejudice to the right of the 
 plaintiffs in this action to have entered a decree upon a final hearing herein, and on 
 sufficient evidence, permanently restraining said irrigation district from constructing 
 such weir or weirs across said river. 
 
 Dated this 5th day of July, 1919. 
 
 TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER. 
 
 In the Superior Court of Yuma County, State of Arizona. Xo. 2429, Yuma County 
 Water Users' Association et al., plaintiffs, c. Imperial Irrigation District et al., 
 defendants. 
 
 To Imperial Irrigation District. ('. R. /{orL-vood, Tom Hines, John Doe, and Richard 
 
 Roe, their agents, servants, employees, and attorneys: 
 
 It satisfactorily appearing, from the reading of the verified complaint herein, that 
 if the defendants are permitted to construct a dam across the Colorado River from a 
 point in Yuma County, State of Arizona, to a point on the Mexican, or California side 
 of said river, for the purpose of raising and forcing the waters of said river into the 
 ditches and canals of the defendant Imperial Irrigation District, that great, immediate, 
 and irreparable injury and damage will result to the plaintiffs therefrom by the 
 prevention thereby of the scouring, eroding, and washing downward of the bottom of 
 said river, thereby causing the waters of said river to erode, wash away, and overflow 
 the levees which protect the lands of the plaintiffs and the persons for whom they sue 
 herein, and thereby causing the water table underlying said lands to be raised and 
 thereby impregnating the said land with an excessive quantity of deleterious salts; 
 and that if notice should be given of a hearing hereon the giving of notice of an appli- 
 cation for an interlocutory writ of injunction and the delay incident thereto would 
 permit the defendants to erect so much of said proposed and threatened dam as would 
 result in immediate and irreparable injury, as aforesaid, to the plaintiffs and the per- 
 sons for whom they sue herein before notice could be served and a hearing had thereon; 
 and it further appearing that the damage threatened to be inflicted upon and suffered 
 by the plaintiffs and the persons for whom they sue herein is not of a nature to be 
 compensation by a money judgment, and that the defendants can not, in any event, 
 respond in damages. 
 
 You and each of you are, therefore, commanded, enjoined, and restrained, and earn 
 of your agents, servants, attorneys, and employees are commanded, enjoined, and 
 restrained, until the further order of this court, and without further notice, from in 
 any way constructing or erecting, or attempting to construct or erect, a dam or dams 
 or any obstruction whatsoever across the Colorado River from a point at, in or near 
 fractional section 3">. T. 10 S.. R. 21 E.. (i. A S. R. meridian, in Yuma County. State 
 of Arizona, or any other point whatsoever in said Yuma < 'ounty. to a point on the 
 California or Mexican side of said river about 400 feet below the C. D. heading, or to any 
 other point whatsoever on the right bank of said river for the purpose of raising and 
 forcing the waters of said river into the ditches and canals of said Imperial Irrigation 
 Co., or for any purpose whatsoever; and you are herein- commanded and enjoined to 
 instantly cease and desist from driving any piles, or doing any other act whatsoever,
 
 154 - DEVELOPMKXT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 in furtherance of the erection or construction of any such dam or dams or in further 
 impeding the flow of said Colorado River upon plaintiffs giving bond in $1,000. 
 
 And you are directed to show cause before said court, in the court room at Yuma, 
 Ariz., on Thursday the LOth day of August, 1916, why a permanent injunction shall 
 not issue restraining you from the preformance of said acts. 
 
 Done in open court this 1st day of August, 191(5, at the hour of 4.55 o'clock p. m. 
 
 FRAXK BAXTER, 
 J.iiilyr oj sai/l ( 'm/rt. 
 
 I, II. B. Farmer, clerk of the superior court of Yuma County, State of Arizona, 
 the same being a court of record, do hereby certify that the bond mentioned in the 
 within order has been filed and approved. 
 
 [SEAL.] H. B. FARMER, Clerk. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Mr. Nickerson. do you wish to present any further facts to the 
 committee? 
 
 Mr. Nickerson. Well, I might say something further. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Can you conveniently remain over till next week? 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. No; I have made arrangements to leave. I can remain only to-day. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I ask unanimous consent that Mr. Nickerson if he desires to add anything 
 be given a reasonable length of time to file an additional written statement. He can 
 probably submit that before he leaves. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. May I say one more word? We have tried to bring the facts 
 up to you gentlemen, and if you are not satisfied with them I want to invite you to 
 come down there, this committee, and see for yourselves. If you do not feel that you 
 are able to act on the evidence we have produced here, I want to ask you to come 
 down on the ground, and I will say that we will pay all expenses both ways to get 
 you there because I tell you we have got to have help. We can not wait until the 
 next Congress: we want you to do something right now. If you are going to have a 
 recess, all right, but when you come back we want you to act to save those people down 
 there from destruction. I can prove to you that every word I have said is absolutely 
 true, and it is up to you gentlemen and you are the agencies we have got to depend on 
 to get us out of this trouble. 
 
 I thank you for the time you have given me and I wish I had more, but I want 
 you to have that in mind now, that we can not wait till next August to get something 
 done for us. If you will only start something it will give us a credit, it will put 
 confidence in the people, it will put confidence in the banks. Business men there 
 have come to me, the best men we have got in that country, and they have said to 
 me, ''For God's sake, Nickerson, get something done, get that flood taken care of, 
 so it will put value on your land and we can come down there and loan money to 
 you." We can't get a dollar from the Federal farm loan or the local banks or the 
 banks in Los Angeles. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. I think the committee ought to recognize the emergency 
 that is confronting the people and the property interests there, but this is a great 
 question and of course the committee will have to give it consideration and submit 
 the facts to the House. I do not think there are very many Members of the House 
 outside of this committee that know much about this. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. It would be a wonderful thing if this committee as a committee could 
 go down there and see that country, see the actual physical conditions as they exist. 
 
 Mr. XICKERSOX. Arizona is in Mr. Hayden's country, and the Yuma district is in 
 nearly as bad a fix as we are, not quite. " They had 2.000 acres covered up last year 
 and the people had to take their things and go to the hills. 
 
 If you people are not satisfied with the information you have gotten, gentlemen, 
 you ought to get it, because we have gone through the department and have gotten 
 up to you now, and it is up to you people to act. I feel that if I had not done thig 
 the responsibility would have been on us. but I feel now that it is on you. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. I'think I will come down into that section and see it myself this fall. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. \Ye will be glad to see you, but we would like to see the whole 
 committee. We can prove every word that we say, gentlemen. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. We appreciate very much the information that you have given 
 us, Mr. Nickerson, and we feel that you are very well advised in regard to conditions 
 on the lower Colorado River. 
 
 Mr. NICKERSON. I ought to be: I have been in that country for a good many years, 
 and the people must think that I know something about it or they would kick me out. I 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I was unavoidably detained at my office at the beginning of to-day's 
 session of the committee. I have since been informed that some telegrams and a
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 155 
 
 letter were included in the record. Mr. Nickerson has also mentioned the interest 
 of Arizona in this matter. I have some statements, articles, and letters from a number 
 of engineers who have discussed the Colorado River problem which I consider worthy 
 of the attention of this committee. I therefore ask leave to have the same printed 
 as a part of these hearings, together with a letter from the Arizona State water commis- 
 sioner, extracts from which I have heretofore read. 
 
 Mr. SMITH of Idaho. If there is no objection they may be inserted in the record. 
 
 Mr. RAKER. What is their attitude in this matter? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Varying attitudes, but principally pointing out the great interest 
 that Arizona has in the control of the Colorado River. 
 
 (The matter referred to is as follows:) 
 
 PHOENIX, ARIZ., May (>, 1922. 
 Hon. CARL HAYDEN, 
 
 House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 
 
 MY DEAR MR. HAYDEN: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of April 29, 
 inclosing copy of the Swing bill. H. R. 11449, which I have read over with a great 
 deal of interest and some misgiving and will give you my reflection thereon. 
 
 In the first section, beginning with line 8 to the end of the section, the language is 
 objected to for the reason that it takes out of the control of the State of Arizona one 
 of her largest undeveloped resources, and one to which we have long looked to be of 
 very great benefit to our State when developed. It would appear from the language 
 that all persons, municipal corporations, private corporations, or States would be 
 prevented from constructing or owning any dams or diversion works in the Colorado 
 Riv'er below the mouth of the Green River. I personally object to this presumed 
 reservation on the part of the United States of the exclusive right to construct, etc., 
 because, as I deem it. the United States has no authority to make any such reserva- 
 tion, nor can such authority be granted by Congress, and, in brief, my reasons for this 
 statement are based on many cases decided by our United States Supreme Court, a 
 very few of which I will cite: 
 
 In Martin r. Waddell (16 Pet. 367) it was held when the American Revolution was 
 concluded, the people of each State became themselves sovereign, and in that char- 
 acter held the absolute right to all their navigable waters and the soils under them 
 for their own common use, subject only to the rights since surrendered by the Consti- 
 tution to the General Government. 
 
 In Pollard r. Hagan (3 How. 212) it was held that the Government of the United 
 States did not by reason of that enactment possess any more power over the navigable 
 waters of Alabama than it possessed over the navigable waters of other States under 
 the provisions of the Constitution, and that Alabama had as much power over thoee 
 navigable waters as the original States possessed over the navigable waters within 
 their respective limits. It was also held that the shores of navigable waters and the 
 soils under them were not granted by the Constitution of the United States, but 
 were reserved to the States, respectively, and the new States had the game rights, 
 sovereignty, and jurisdiction over the subject as the original States. 
 
 In Hardin v. Jordan (140 U. S. 371), the court said: "This right of the States to 
 regulate and control the shores of tide waters and the land under them is the same as 
 that which is exercised by the Crown in England. In this country the same rule has 
 been extended to our great navigable lakes, which are treated as inland seas; and 
 also, in some of the States, the navigable rivers, as the Mississippi, the Missouri, the 
 Ohio, and in Pennsylvania to all the permanent rivers of the State, but it depends 
 on the law of each State to what waters and to what extent this prerogatory of the State 
 over the lands under water shall be exercised." 
 
 In the same case Mr. Justice Brewer, in his dissenting opinion, stated: "That the 
 question how far the title of the riparian owner extends is one of local law. For a 
 determination of that question the siatutes of the State and the decisions of ite 
 highest court furnish the best and the final authority." 
 
 In Kaukauna Water Power Co. v. Green Bay & Misissippi Canal Cos. (142 U. S. 
 254) Mr. JustirejBrown, in delivering the opinion of the court, said: "It is the settled 
 law of Wisconsin, announced in repeated decisions of ite supreme court, that the 
 ownership of riparian proprietors extends to the center or thread of the stream, subject, 
 if such stream be navigable, to the right of the public to its use as a public highway 
 for the passage of its vessels. * * * 
 
 "With respect to such rights we have held that the law of the State, as closed by ita 
 supreme court, is controlling as a rule of property." 
 
 In Shively v. Bowlby (152 U. S. 1) it was held that upon the question how far the 
 title of the owner of the land extends bordering upon a river actually navigable both 
 above the ebb and flow of the tide, there is a diversity in the laws of the different 
 States; and that the title and rights or riparian or littoral proprietors in the soil below
 
 156 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 high-water mark are governed by the law? \ the several States, subject to the rights 
 granted to the United States by the Constitution. 
 
 In the same case it was held: "The jurisdiction of the State over this question of 
 riparian ownership has always been, from the foundation of the Government, recog- 
 nized and admitted by this court." 
 
 In Weber v. the Board of Harbor Commissions (Wall. 57, U. S. Kept. 85 1. Mr. Justice 
 Field, in delivering the opinion of the court, among other things, said: "Although the 
 title to the soil under the tidewaters of the bay was acquired by the United States by 
 cession from Mexico, equally with the title to the upland, they held it only in trust 
 for the future State. Upon the admission of California into the Union upon equal 
 footing with the original States, absolute property in and dominion and sovereignty 
 over all soils under the tidewaters within her limits passed to the State, with the con- 
 sequent right to dispose of the title to any part of said soils in such manner as she might 
 deem proper, subject only to the paramount right of navigation of the waters so far as 
 such navigation might be required by the necessities of commerce with foreign nations 
 or among the several States, the regulation of which is vested in the General Govern- 
 ment." 
 
 In Port of Seattle v. Oregon & Washington Railroad Co. and J. F. Duthie cV <',,.. 
 reported in Xo. 8, advance sheets. United States Supreme Court, page 265, March 1. 
 1921. Mr. Justice Brandeis. in delivering the opinion of the court, among other things, 
 said, first: "The right of the United States in the navigable waters within the several 
 States is limited to the control thereof for purposes of navigation. * * 
 
 "The extent of the State's ownership of the land is more accurately defined by the 
 decision of the highest court as being tne land below high -water mark or the meander 
 line, whichever of these lines is the lower. The character of the State's ownership 
 in the land and in the waters is the full proprietary right. The State, being the 
 absolute owner of the tidelands and the waters over them, is free in conveying tide- 
 lands either to grant with them rights in the adjoining water area or to completely 
 withhold all such rights." 
 
 From these citations and many others that might be made, I conceive the notion 
 that the United States can not reserve to itself the exclusive control of the Colorado 
 River from the mouth of the Green to the Gulf of California, for I hold that the State 
 of Arizona owns the bed of the stream from high-water mark to high-water mark and 
 the waters flowing in the stream within the confines of the State or Arizona: that 
 the right of the State of Arizona is a proprietary right ; that under the laws of the State 
 of Arizona, even the Government of the United States must make application to the 
 State for a permit the same as any individual, company, or corporation. 
 
 The bill appears to view the whole situation from a California standpoint and to 
 entirely absorb Arizona and its rights in the river. 
 
 Section 2 of the bill authorizes the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam. and 
 also the construction of the proposed all-American canal, which is a purely California 
 project. To neither of these projects do we. so far as I am personally concerned, have 
 any objection so long as the Boulder Canyon Dam is constructed in the place where 
 and in the manner which w r ould best serve the interests of the State of Arizona, and 
 that the rights of Arizona are maintained in such development. 
 
 Section 3 gives to the Secretary of the Interior the right to dispose of the utilization 
 of the water for the generation of electric power, and my own opinion is that it should 
 include the statement that the State of Arizona should have a preferred right to the 
 extent of the needs of the State. 
 
 Section 4 of the bill should also include the statement that the State of Arizona 
 should have a preferred right to take over the property wholly within the State upon 
 the payment as suggested in the section. 
 
 Section 5 of the bill is a grant to the Secretary of the Interior to allow the purchase 
 of property in the State of Arizona by such political subdivisions that shall have heen 
 allocated fights for the generation of power. This, of course, has particular reference 
 to the City of Los Angeles. Imperial Valley, other cities in Southern California and 
 the State of California, and it does not appear to me that either the State of California 
 or any political subdivision of the State of California should be permitted to purchase 
 and own property that might be determined to be real property, of the character 
 referred to. in the State of Arizona in perpetuity, and. therefore. I object to section 5 
 in its present form. 
 
 I realize that if the Boulder Canyon Dam were constructed at the present time, it 
 would be necessary to allow a portion at least of the power to go to California points, 
 as well as Nevada'and Utah, because there would not be a market for all the power 
 that could be produced there within the State of Arizona, and I see no objection in 
 that, but to allow IMS Angeles, for instance, to come into the State of Arizona and 
 purchase the power plant and lands necessary in its operation, or the dam and the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN". 157 
 
 plant, to hold in perpetuity. I think is goins too far. There should be a time limit on 
 any possessory right owned by outside political subdivisions, at the termination of 
 which either the Government of the United States or the State of Arizona should have 
 the right to take over the property and rights attached thereto. 
 
 I see no objection to section (i and the sections following, except that the bill is 
 practically for the development of California and does not include any develonment 
 in the State of Arizona, except the development of power generally. 
 
 On the whole. I think the bill should be materially amended, for in some particulars 
 it conflicts with the authority delegated to the Colorado River Commission, and until 
 the Colorado River Commission compact has been made and ratified we do not know 
 all the provisions it wil\ contain, but whatever provisions it shall contain, must be 
 deemed the law of the basin; all other laws of the .States involved pertaining to the 
 same subject to the contrary notwithstanding. 
 Very truly yours. 
 
 W. S. XORVIEL, 
 State Water Commissioner. 
 
 THE COLORADO RIVER AND ARIZONA'S INTEREST IN ITS DEVELOPMENT. 
 [By G. E. P. Smith, Irrigation Engineer, Univerity of Arizona.] 
 
 It is nearly 400 years since Spanish explorers discovered the canyons of the Colorado 
 River. During these centuries mankind has coped with many problems and has 
 surmounted great obstacles. But the 600-mile stretch of canyon of the Colorado of 
 the West is still under nature's control. No stone has been turned to impede the flow 
 of water; no revolving wheel converts the power of the flood to useful purposes. 
 
 The development of the great river is a stupendous problem. Not alone is the lay- 
 man staggered by the difficulties involved and by the immensity of the stakes, but 
 the engineer is challenged and is struggling to conceive of the gigantic works that are 
 required dams of twice the height of the highest dam yet attempted, reservoirs 12 to 
 20 times as large as the largest artificial reservoir in the world, and power generation 
 on a prodigious scale. 
 
 GEOGRAPHY AND IRRIGABLE LANDS. 
 
 Before presenting the problems of the Colorado River it may be helpful to review 
 the geography oi the region and to present a digest of the character and extent of the 
 water supply. 
 
 The drainage basin of the Colorado is shown in figure 1. It includes parts of seven 
 States the southwestern part of Wyoming, the western half of Colorado, the eastern 
 half of Utah, a strip along the west side of New Mexico, all of Arizona except the south- 
 east corner, the southeast part of Nevada, and the southeast edge of California in all, 
 251,000 square miles. The watershed on the east side of the basin is the Continental 
 Divide, from the Mexican boundary line almost to Yellowstone Park. All of the 
 northern half of the basin, and part of the southern half, consists of high, mountainous 
 country, on which there is a heavy annual precipitation. 
 
 Until a year ago that part of the stream system draining western Colorado was 
 called the Grand River. In the southeastern part of Utah that stream unites with the 
 Green River, the headwaters of which are in Wyoming. Below the junction of the 
 Grand and the Green the stream was called the Colorado. A year ago, by congressional 
 action, the name of the Grand was changed to Colorado; presumably geography and, 
 ultimately, public usage will adopt the new name for the upper river. The principal 
 tributaries below the junction of the Green and the Grand are the San Juan, flowing 
 westerly from the northwest corner of New Mexico; the Little Colorado, which drains 
 the north side of the Mogollon Rim in Arizona; and the Gila, which drains the central 
 and southern parts of Arizona. 
 
 In the upper basin, that is. the basin above the Grand Canyon, there is a large area 
 of land under cultivation, about 1,500,000 acres, mostly on the headwaters and 
 tributaries where diversions from the streams are easily accomplished. The irrigation 
 of the land, however, requires comparatively little water, on account of the high 
 altitude, cold climate and short growing season, and part of the water applied returns 
 underground to the stream. An even greater area, now idle, is susceptible of irrigation, 
 part of it, however, at such high cost as to make the projects of doubtful feasibility. 
 Studies made by the United States Reclamation Service indicate that the irrigated 
 area in the upper basin will be increased to 3.000,000 acres. 
 
 In the lower basin, below the Grand Canyon, the areas irrigated in 1920 included 
 39,000 acres between Needles and Yuma, mostly on the California side; 54,000 acres
 
 158 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 in the Yuma project; 415.000 acres in the Imperial Valley; and 190.000 acres south of 
 the international boundary line a total of 698.000 acres. " This total is almost exactly 
 double the acreage irrigated in 1913. showing the rapid rate of increase in the use of 
 water in the lower basin. The possible extension of irrigation in the lower basin has 
 not been determined fully, but conservative estimates indicate that the following 
 additional areas can be brought under irrigation: 260.000 acres between Needles and 
 Yuma, 150,000 acres of which is on the Arizona side; 76,000 acres in the Yuma project; 
 400,000 acres in the Imperial and Coachella Valleys; and 630.000 acres in Mexico. 
 
 WATER SUPPLY. 
 
 Engineers have methods, of comparative accuracy, for measuring the quantity of 
 water flowing in rivers. The record of the flow, day by day, month by month, shows 
 the extent of the water supply and its fluctuations, and furnishes a basis for the design 
 of engineering works. On the Colorado River and its tributaries, many gauging 
 stations, at carefully chosen locations, have been kept for varying periods of time, 
 some of the records extending over 25 years. 
 
 The records of stream flow at Yuma have been kept since January, 1902. The 
 gaging station is below the mouth of the Gila River and below the Yuma diversion 
 dam, but above the head gates of the Imperial Canal. The average annual flow at 
 the gaging station for the period 1902-1920 was 17.300,000 acre-feet. Had the present 
 irrigated area been under irrigation throughout the period of the record, the average 
 annual flow would have been about 16,000.000 acre-feet. The average flow at Boulder 
 Canyon is practically the same amount, since diversions and losses between Boulder 
 Canyon and Yuma are balanced by the inflow of tributaries. 
 
 Most of the water comes from the upper basin. At the junction of the Grand and 
 the Green, the average annual discharge of the Grand is 6,900,000 acre-feet, and of the 
 Green 5,500,000 acre-feet. The Green and Grand and San Juan Rivers together, 
 though draining less than two-fifths of the area of the Colorado Basin, furnish 86 per 
 cent of the total water supply. 
 
 By far the greater part of the precipitation in Colorado and Wyoming is in the form 
 of snow. During the winter the snow accumulates to great depths. The melting of 
 the snow during the spring months produces a long period of high water, the annual 
 flood, which lasts from two to three months and reaches its highest point at Yuma 
 usually in June. During the June flood of 1909, the flow at Yuma reached 150,000 
 cubic feet per second. On June 27, 1921, all previous June records were broken by a 
 flow of 186,000 cubic feet per second. The low-water season begins in August and 
 lasts from three to seven months. The minimum flow at Yuma has been below 4,000 
 cubic feet per second during several low-water seasons. 
 
 The Gila River drains an area of 57,000 square miles. While the average annual 
 discharge of the river is not great it is very variable. In 1916 the discharge of the 
 river at its mouth was 4,500,000 acre-feet: in some other years the total has been less 
 than 100,000 acre-feet. Short-lived, "flashy" floods, greater than the highest peak 
 floods in the Colorado, occur at times. The flow on January 16, 1916, reached 220,000 
 cubic feet per second. It is fortunate that the Gila floods do not come at the same 
 time as the Colorado floods, in May or June. Should they coincide, the menace to the 
 Yuma and Imperial valleys would be intensified; the levees would be overwhelmed. 
 
 RESERVOIR SITES. 
 
 There are scores, hundreds, of storage sites in the middle and upper parts of the 
 Colorado Basin. Many of them have been surveyed, and at several of the sites the 
 depth to bedrock has been ascertained by diamond drilling. The Strawberry Valley 
 site in Utah and the Roosevelt site in Arizona and some small sites have been occu- 
 pied already. For the complete regulation and utili/ation of the river, there are 
 adequate natural opportunities: the real problem is as to which is the best. A few 
 of the largest and most promising sites, those which are of greatest public interest,, 
 will be discussed. 
 
 The Dewey Reservoir site is situated on the Grand River just west of the Utah- 
 Colorado line. Although one of the last to be discovered, it is one of the best. It is 
 the only site for a large reservoir on the Grand River except the Kremmling, and 
 that site is occupied by a railroad. The bedrock at the Dewey site is only 44 feet 
 below the river bed, and the capacity with a dam only 215 feet high from river bed 
 to spillway is 2,300,000 acre-feet. 
 
 The Flaming Gorge site is on the Green River in Utah just south of the Wyoming 
 line. The greatest depth to bedrock is 73 feet, and a 215-foot dam will impound 
 3,120,000 acre-feet. The width of the canyon is 200 feet. The Flaming Gorge and 
 the Dewey sites control the most important headwaters of the Colorado. Both are 
 excellent projects and should be under construction to-day.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 159 
 
 Another excellent site is on the Yampa tributary, near Juniper Mountain. The 
 drainage area is small, but the stream flow approximates 1.000,000 acre-feet of water 
 per year. A 200-foot clam would provide a capacity of 1,500,000 acre-feet. The 
 depth to bedrock is 21 feet. 
 
 The Ouray Reservoir site is on the Green River a hundred miles below the Flaming 
 _re site. This site is remarkable in that a dam only 210 feet high would impound 
 16,000,000 acre-feet of water. The greatest depth to bedrock, a factor of great influ- 
 ence on the cost of a dam, is 121 feet, and the canyon is not narrow. This site should 
 be held available by the Federal Government until it is absolutely certain that the 
 site is not needed in the general scheme for development of the river. If the site is 
 restored to entry, it will be seized at once by the Denver & Salt Lake Railroad. The 
 railway can be built around the reservoir site. 
 
 A reservoir at the junction of the Green and the Grand has been under consideration 
 for many years. It would regulate partially both streams. A dam 250 feet high 
 would impound 7,450,000 acre-feet. Borings were made to 120 feet without encoun- 
 tering bedrock. It is unfortunate that the borings were not carried somewhat deeper. 
 
 An apparently excellent reservoir site exists on the San Juan near Bluff, Utah, 
 but its feasibility has not been established by test holes to find bedrock. A dam 264 
 feet high would create a reservoir of 2,600,000 acre-feet capacity. The accumulation 
 of silt in this reservoir would be very rapid. 
 
 The Glen Canyon, or Lees Ferry, site outclasses all other proposed sites in its gigantic 
 possibilities. The maximum development contemplates a dam 700 feet high, 450 
 feet long at the level of the river, and 1,400 feet long on top. The proposed slopes 
 are One to six downstream and one to four upstream, making the length of base up 
 and downstream over a mile. The capacity of the reservoir would be over 50,000,000 
 acre-feet, and 86 per cent of the entire water supply of the Colorado Basin would be 
 regulated completely. Over a million continuous horsepower could be developed 
 without sacrifice of irrigation interests. Complete surveys of the reservoir site have 
 been made during the last few months. No test borings have been made, and it is 
 stated that the depth to bedrock is not a crucial matter on account of the radial char- 
 acter of the dam contemplated. Test borings should be made at once. 
 
 Excellent dam sites exist in Cataract Canyon and Marble Canyon. The project 
 for Marble Canyon provides for a power development of 1,300,000 horsepower, but 
 the storage possibilities are small. This will be the last of the major projects because 
 of its magnitude and high cost. 
 
 On the Little Colorado River there is a dam site at Tolchaco, where the entire flood 
 flow of that stream can be controlled by a dam 50 feet high. 
 
 The site at the mouth of Diamond Creek is of particular interest to Arizona, on 
 account of its favorable location and because it is controlled by Arizona people. The 
 site is only 16 miles from Peach Springs, a station on the Santa Fe Railroad. It is a 
 power project only, there being practically no storage. Present plans, subject to 
 modification, call for a dam 284 feet high, 324 feet above bedrock, to the spillway crest, 
 and the top of the structure would be 25 feet higher. About 110.000 horsepower could 
 be developed with the unregulated flow of the river, but in case the flow is equalized 
 by a project with storage farther up the river the ultimate power development may 
 reach (iOO.OOO horsepower. The canyon at this site is only 220 feet wide at the water 
 level, and the length of the dam at the top will be 600 feet, about the same as the 
 Roosevelt Dam. The walls and foundation are of granite. The main electric trans- 
 mission line would extend through, or near, Prescott, Phoenix, Mesa, Florence, and 
 Tucson to Douglas, with important laterals to Jerome, Ray, Globe, Clifton, Ajo, and 
 Yurna. 
 
 The Boulder Canyon site is in a similar narrow canyon in granite rock. The canyon 
 walls are 300 feet apart. Here it is proposed to build a solid concrete masonry dam 600 
 feet high, 735 feet above bedrock, to elevation 1,300 feet above sea level. The capacity 
 of the reservoir is 31,600,000 acre-feet, and the estimated cost of the dam alone is 
 $55,000,000. The great depth to bedrock is the main disadvantage of this site. While 
 the problems of carrying the foundation to so great a depth and of passing the annual 
 and occasional floods of the river during the construction period strike terror to the 
 heart of the engineer, the task can be accomplished if adequate funds are provided. 
 The power development will be 700,000 continuous horsepower as long as the irrigated 
 area in the lower basin does not exceed 1,500,000 acres, and will decrease to 600,000 
 horsepower as the acreage increases to 2,000,000 acres. 
 
 The last annual report of the United States Reclamation Service states that an in- 
 spection of the lower river was made by boat by Homer Hamlin. a noted engineer, in 
 April, 1920, and that he reports that there is no 9-ood dm site for a storage reservoir 
 between Boulder Canvon and Yuma.
 
 160 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 THE THREE GREAT PROBLEMS. 
 
 Three objects are sought in the development of the Colorado River. They are: (1) 
 Storage for flood protection; (2) storage to provide more water for the latter half of the 
 irrigation season and for dry years; and (3) hydroelectric power. 
 
 The flood protection is the main incentive which is spurring many agencies to action. 
 The people of the Imperial Valley, for Hi years, have been lighting a defensive battle 
 against the Colorado, sometimes gaining, sometimes losing, but in the main losing. 
 They can not hold out for many more years. At least once every year, in June, and 
 sometimes at other seasons, the river threatens to change its course frcm the Gulf of 
 California to the Imperial Valley, as it did in 1905. The only protection at present is 
 the system of levees, called respectively the first, second, and third lines of defense. 
 Frequently the floods breakthrough the first and second lines and reach the third line. 
 Each year the river, through silt deposition, builds up that part of the alluvial fan in 
 front of the levees, in some years as much as 4 feet, and each year the levees must be 
 raised an equal amount. Over one-quarter of a million dollars is expended each year 
 by the farmers of the Imperial Valley in this work. The limit will be reached soon. 
 Levees 40 or 50 feet high can not be maintained. 
 
 The Yuma Valley also is protected by levees, but the danger there does not increase. 
 Arizona hopes to develop another great irrigated valley farther upstream at Parker, 
 but much of the Parker Valley is now subject to overflow and must be protected by an 
 expensive system of levees unless adequate regulation of the flood waters is provided 
 by storage reservoirs. Regulation of the Green and the Grand will solve the problem 
 in large measure, but tributaries below the junction must be given consideration. On 
 one occasion a flood of 150,000 second-feet measured at Bluff, Utah, was contributed by 
 the San Juan, and the Gila River floods likewise are a menace with which to reckon. 
 
 As for storage to equalize the supply for irrigation, the situation is more critical than 
 is commonly known. Despite the great excess of water which is wasted to the ocean 
 each year, there is an actual shortage during the latter part of the irrigation season in 
 dry years. In 1915 the entire flow of the river was diverted into the Imperial Canal at 
 the end of August, and yet there was not enough water to meet the demand. Since 
 that time the acreage irrigated from the river has increased 300,000 acres. If the 
 natural flow next September is as low as it was in 1915, there will be 300,000 acres of 
 crops without any water to bring them to maturity, and the financial loss and human 
 suffering will be appalling. Again, it is the Imperial Valley that is in danger, for 
 other projects have the advantage of location upstream. No further expansion of 
 irrigation use should be allowed until storage is provided ; it should be admitted that 
 the natural flow is entirely appropriated. It does not seem practicable, however, to 
 prevent continued appropriation and use of water in Utah and Colorado. 
 
 But how can storage be financed? The Imperial Valley is burdened already with 
 a heavy bonded indebtedness and is facing the further problem of the all-American 
 canal, which is expected to cost $30,000,000. The farmers can not finance the 
 river regulation which they require and must have. 
 
 Now enters the third element of the great project power. The power possibilities 
 are so great, and power is so valuable, that it is estimated the sale of power will pay 
 for the entire project. A few months ago the proposal was to charge 5 per cent of the 
 cost of the storage dam to irrigation, 10 per cent to flood protection, and 85 per cent 
 to power. Now it is proposed to charge the entire cost to the power privileges. About 
 4,000,000 horsepower can be developed in Arizona at the four sites mentioned above. 
 
 Is there a market for so much power? Arizona can take about 100,000 horsepower 
 to replace present steam plants. Cheap power will permit of increased pump irriga- 
 tion, the mining of lower grade ores, and the electrification of our railways. We 
 shall have factories where our own raw materials can be fabricated, cotton mills, 
 copper and brass foundries; and the electrolytic refining of Arizona copper can be 
 done in our own State. All city and house lighting will be done with hydroelectric 
 power, and any excess can be used for making nitrate fertilizers. 
 
 But other States, especially California, will compete for the power. A great amount 
 can be marketed in southern California now. It is estimated that in 15 years all 
 possible hydroelectric development in that State will have been accomplished, and 
 California interests are looking much farther ahead than that. 
 
 Nearly all of the power requirements of the mining industry in Arizona are now 
 supplied from petroleum fuel oil. The best opinions regarding the future supply of 
 fuel oil point to a diminution of the supply and rapidly rising prices. It is essential 
 that hydroelectric power be developed to replace the failing oil supply.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 161 
 
 PROPOSAL OF THE UNITED STATES RECLAMATION" SERVICE. 
 
 Engineers of the United States Reclamation Service have been studying the problem 
 of the Colorado for eight years, and have decided quite definitely on what they believe 
 should be the first project. The service has recommended to Congress that it should 
 be a project of the Federal Government, and the Secretary of the Interior stated pub- 
 licly at the Riverside and San Diego conventions in December, 1921, that, because 
 of the international and interstate character of the river, the Federal Government is 
 the only competent agency to construct the great dam that must be built, and to 
 control and operate its gates. He is right, and Arizona should back to the the limit 
 Federal ownership and operation of the main river-control project. 
 
 The Reclamation Service recommends that the dam be located in Boulder Canyon , 
 on the boundary line between Arizona and Nevada. On account of the peculiar 
 situation, the west end of the dam would be re,st on the Arizona side. A transmission 
 line from that point to Phoenix would be about 250 miles long, and a line to Los 
 Angeles 277 miles in length. The proposed 600-foot dam provides for storage for 
 irrigation and for storage of silt for 60 years, and for 5,000,000 acre-feet capacity at 
 the top to be used only for detention of high-flood crests, such as those of 1907, 1909, 
 1914, and 1920. 
 
 Last July, when Congress was committed to retrenchment, and it seemed impossible 
 to interest the East in this most necessary undertaking, plans were made to contract 
 the power privileges in advance to municipalities and States or to other purchasers, 
 and the purchasers were to obtain the necessary funds through sale of bond issues. 
 The, city of Los Angeles was ready to take all or as much of the power as would be 
 allowed to that city. Now, it is believed that there is a good fighting chance to obtain 
 the money through Federal appropriation, with ultimate return of the cost to the 
 Government by the sale of power. 
 
 ALTERNATIVE PROPOSALS. 
 
 Although crystallization of sentiment in favor of Boulder Canyon project has made 
 considerable headway, still some widely divergent views are being expressed, and it 
 may not be impertinent to discuss alternative proposals. It is contended that for 
 many reasons the river development should begin farther upstream. That the Boulder 
 Canyon site is the one nearest to the best market for power is a sound argument. Of 
 the other arguments advanced for that site, some are not valid, and fhe others may be 
 met by the statement that extensive storage in the upper basin can be followed advan- 
 tageously, and will be, by projects providing additional storage on the lower river. 
 If the flood hazard is removed or is greatly reduced by means of extensive storage in 
 Utah, the Boulder Canyon Dam can be built at much less cost and in fewer years. 
 Further, if the river regulation is effected in the upper basin, the power sites from 
 Glen Canyon to Boulder Canyon, inclusive, become much more valuable, since the 
 water supply is equalized and because less reserve space is required for detention 
 purposes. The upper locations will be developed eventually; why not now? 
 
 From that standpoint the Dewey site on the Grand River and the Flaming Gorge 
 site on the Green offer the best solution. Hoth dams could be built at once, and the 
 total cost would be only about $25.000,000. The Juniper Mountain Reservoir would 
 cost $4,000.000. These sites are above the great silt-gathering area of the drainage 
 basin. The Flaming Gorge and Dewey Reservoirs would provide ample late-summer 
 water supply for the lower basin for many years to come. The Flaming Gorge Reser- 
 voir would serve to reduce the spring floods on the Green River one-third, and the 
 Dewey Reservoir would take the peak off from the spring floods of the Grand. The 
 Dewey Reservoir would be operated so as to be entirely empty at the beginning of the 
 flood period. Both dams could be completed in five years. It is premised, however, 
 that the construction of these dams would be followed by that of one or more others 
 farther downstream possibly one on the San Juan or at Lees Ferry, and either the 
 Diamond Creek Dam or Boulder Canyon Dam or both. The dams on the headwaters 
 should be built under the same theory of government as were the 33 dams on the 
 Ohio River, that is. to secure river regulation and control, to make the stream man- 
 ageable and utilizable. Navigation is no more vital to the economic and social welfare 
 of the group of six States bordering the Ohio than is the taming and harnessing of the 
 Colorado to the welfare of the seven States along its course. In due time the Govern- 
 ment might be reimbursed for the investment, for, after the construction of large 
 storage reservoirs in Arizona, the Utah reservoirs would be of great value for power 
 production. 
 
 The Diamond Creek project is capable of comparatively rapid construction, and is 
 quite likely to go ahead of the Boulder Dam in point of time. It would be a strictly
 
 162 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Arizona enterprise, and free from the entangling jurisdictions that are inevitable in 
 the larger projects. It does not in any way lessen the necessity for the Boulder Dam 
 or some other dam which can provide storage and flood control. 
 
 Another proposal is to make Lees Fern- Reservoir the first major undertaking. On 
 account of the type of dam planned, the extent of flooding in the river during con- 
 struction would be immaterial. This reservoir as planned would store 30 per cent 
 more water than the Boulder Canyon Reservoir, the production of power would be 
 much greater, and the cost would be less. However, on account of the radical design 
 and proposed methods of construction, the project should be submitted to the best 
 engineering talent in the world before it can be right or wise to adopt it. 
 
 WATER RIGHTS. 
 
 The Supreme Court of the United States has decided that in the case of interstate- 
 streams in the arid region, neither the riparian theory of water rights nor the priority 
 of appropriation theory can obtain, but that each State is entitled to benefit from the 
 river to substantial benefits. Presumably, the distribution of benefits must be 
 made by the Federal court. But in the cage of the Colorado River, where there is 
 water enough for all. there seems to be no necessity for any litigation. 
 
 The States of the upper basin seem to fear that the construction of large reservoirs 
 will serve automatically to appropriate the waters of the river for use in the lower 
 basin, and that additional development of irrigation in the upper States will be pre- 
 vented. Oft -repeated assertions of the United States Geological Survey and the 
 United States Reclamation Service that the water supply is ample and adequate for 
 all of the irrigable lands of both upper and lower basins have not served to allay the 
 fear. Another cause of alarm in Colorado is the doubt as to whether that State will 
 be allowed to divert 310.000 acre-feet of water per year from the Colorado basin, through 
 tunnels at narrow places in the watershed, for use on the plains north and east of 
 Denver, as is desired. 
 
 The upper States therefore are demanding a guaranty of unrestricted irrigation 
 development in the upper basin before they will lend their support or consent to a 
 Federal project in the canyon region. The lower-basin States are asking for an allot- 
 ment of the water supply among the seven States. 
 
 The wisdom of a perpetual guaranty or of an allotment of the waters of the river 
 is questionable. On no other river basin has either been attempted. It is not possi- 
 ble to foresee conditions a hundred years ahead, or even 30 years ahead. All irri- 
 gators who are putting the water to beneficial use should be protected, but in princi- 
 ple it may be exceedingly dangerous to reserve a valuable water supply for a project 
 which may prove to be of doubtful feasibility. If an allotment of the water is 
 attempted, most of the seven States will advance extravagant claims to water. Some 
 of the States most involved have no adequate conception of the feasibility of their 
 projects, and no just allotment can be made without thorough surveys of all proposed 
 irrigation lands. It is unlikely that any allotment can be proposed which will not 
 be held up in some legislature for many years, and meanwhile the ruin of the Imperial 
 Valley may be accomplished. 
 
 There is no necessity for a distribution of the unused water rights at this time. 
 If the act to appropriate money for a Colorado River project shall state as follows: 
 ''Provided. That nothing in this act shall be so construed as to affect in any way the 
 rights to the use of the waters of the Colorado Basin of any State or any part of a State, " 
 then the upper States can not be affected adversely by the project. 
 
 The average annual discharge of the river into the Gulf of California is 13,000,000 
 acre-feet. The projects of the upper basin are such that probably no more than 
 3,000,000 acre-feet of water additional can be consumed in those projects, and the 
 balance of 10,000,000 acre-feet is more than twice as much as the States of the lower 
 basin can use at least until a different economic order shall prevail. 
 
 Congress, through the Mondell Act, has provided for a Colorado River Commission 
 '(insisting of one representative from each of the seven States and one from the Fed- 
 eral Government. The commission is now organized, with Herbert Hoover as its 
 chairman, representing the Federal Government. The purpose expressed in the 
 Mondell Act is the negotiation of a compact or agreement providing for an equitable 
 division or apportionment of the water supply among the seven States. 
 
 NAVIGABILITY. 
 
 The existing treaty with Mexico declares the Colorado River to be a navigable 
 stream, and a Federal court prohibited any action which might interfere with its 
 navigability. The diversion of water for irrigation, therefore, is contrary to the treaty.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 163 
 
 As soon as diplomatic relations with Mexico are reestablished steps should be taken 
 to amend the treaty in so far as it affects the Colorado. The river should be declared 
 to be an unnavigable stream. 
 
 ARIZONA'S PROGRAM. 
 
 Arizona owns the Colorado River bed, or half of it, for 580 miles. We do not own 
 the water. We do not have unlimited millions of wealth to invest in the Colorado 
 enterprises, nor many votes in Congress. We should endeavor to cooperate with our 
 neighbor States. When the seven States agree upon a plan of action, the extreme 
 urgency of the case will secure the appropriation needed. 
 
 With regard to some features of the project Ari/onans will express their opinions 
 but should not insist upon them. The immediate construction of the storage dam 
 and the height of dam and the type of dam are far more vital to California than to us. 
 Nothing can prevent our obtaining all the power the State can use, both now and for 
 50 years to come. Our preferential rights to power are recognized. Also it is pro- 
 posed to grant Arizona and Nevada each a free block of power at Boulder site. Our 
 concern must be to insure that there shall be no monopoly of power by a single cor- 
 poration and that every nook and corner of the State shall be able to receive power 
 at equitable rates. 
 
 We should pledge the State's honor to the States of the upper basin that any con- 
 struction of dams for the benefit of the lower basin shall not prejudice in any way their 
 equitable rights. 
 
 But the irrigation of our lands we must insist on; the development of the Parker 
 protect of 110,000 acres and of the Mohave Valley of 27,000 acres and of the Cibola 
 Valley of 15,000 acres, and that the right to double the acreage under irrigation at 
 Yuma, as is contemplated, shall not be denied. It will require at least two new 
 diversion dams similar to the Laguna Dam, and they must be started in time to be 
 finished when the storage dam is finished. The great river control dam and the power 
 will be secured largely because California is fighting with us. But for the irrigation 
 of Arizona lands we must fight alone. It does not follow necessarily that our lands 
 will be irrigated if the Boulder Dam or Lees Ferry Dam is built. Provision for the 
 Parker diversion dam should, if possible, be put into the act which shall provide 
 for the larger project. Be it said also that the Parker and Mohave projects do not 
 have the usual influential citizens and real estate boosters to present their claims. 
 They are still under the care of the United States Indian Service. Congress passed 
 an act for their opening to entry several years ago, and the matter is now sleeping. 
 There are only a few Indians, and they have received allotments. It is the finest 
 opportunity in the whole United States to provide lands for former service men 
 not less than 3,500 of them. The State of Arizona has got to speak loudly for those 
 projects. 
 
 Lastly, the high-line irrigation project what of it? It has been claimed that if 
 the high dam is located in Boulder Canyon, water can be turned into a canal on a 
 high level, and led through the mountain passes of Mohave County, across Bill Wil- 
 liams River, through the Bouse Valley to Harrisburg Valley, and down the < Vnlennial 
 Wash to the Gila River. The writer has studied all the available data, and is of the 
 opinion that the project is not feasible. Regardless of how desirable it would be 
 to bring under irrigation from the Colorado River an extensive area of elevated desert 
 land, yet it is better for the people of Arizona to dream no vague dreams and to con- 
 centrate all efforts to obtain those developments which arc practicable. 
 
 In the first place, the high-line project would require a clam 500 or 600 feet high 
 to raise the water to the level of the canal. A great reservoir of dead storage water 
 would be created, for the water level could never again be allowed to fall below the 
 elevation of the canal. Storage to regulate and equalize the water supply must ix- 
 provided by building the dam considerably higher than the canal level or by means 
 of another reservoir, preferably at Lees Ferry. Probably there would be two great 
 dams required instead of one. 
 
 The high-line canal would be built along the rough mountain sides of Mohave 
 County, but no water could be taken through the Sacramento Valley Pass or through 
 any other pass to lands behind the mountain range that borders the river in that 
 county. 
 
 Assuming an elevation of 1,200 feet above sea level for the canal at its head, the 
 elevation in the vicinity of Bouse would be about 1,050 feet, 120 feet lower than the 
 proposed canal that is designed to irrigate the Bous<> Valley from the Williams Rivet. 
 About 90,000 acres in the Bouse Valley could be irrigated by pumping from the 
 canal. By boosting the water 350 feet by means of pumps, the water could be led 
 to Vicksbiirg, and then another boost of 500 feet would deliver it into the Harrisburg 
 Valley, or, perhaps it would be cheaper to avoid the last-named lift by tunneling
 
 164 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 through the Little Harquahala Mountains. It would be more feasible to leave the 
 Little Harquahalas and Coyote Mountain to the east of the canal, but even so, the 
 pumping lift would be impractical. The maximum area that could be brought under 
 such a high-line system would be less than a million acres, mostly in Yuma County. 
 
 As an alternative proposal, the water for the high-line canal might be dropped at 
 the high dam, generating power, and this power could be used to lift the water from 
 the river near Parker into a high-line canal starting at that point. The electrical 
 transmission losses would be no larger in percentage than the seepage and evapora- 
 tion losses of water from the 260 miles of canal, and the investment would be less. 
 About 1 kilowatt would be required per acre irrigated for the main lift to elevation 
 1,060 at Parker, requiring an investment of about $100 per acre for power equipment, 
 while the cost of the canal from the high dam to Parker would be more than twice 
 as much. The value of the power used on this one lift, per irrigated acre, at one-half 
 cent per kilowatt hour, would be about $30 per year. Neither proposition is feasible, 
 at least not during the present generation. An investment of over ,$300 per acre 
 would be required. The best raw valley land in Arizona can not stand a construc- 
 tion change for irrigation over $150 per acre. 
 
 There is one possibility for which plans and estimates should perhaps be prepared. 
 This is the possibility of pumping from the river at or near Cocopah Point, near the 
 head of I.aguna Lake, on a lift of about 350 feet, to a canal which would then run east- 
 erly on the north side of the Lower Gila Valley, crossing the river near Sentinel, and 
 running thence on grade toward the southwest, covering about 250.000 acres of land. 
 Power could be generated at Cocopah Point by means of a low rock-fil! dam after river 
 regulation has been secured farther upstream. This project may be practicable 20 
 years hence. 
 
 THE GILA RIVER SYSTEM. 
 
 It seems to have been forgotten that the Gila tributary is a vital element of the 
 Colorado River, and that the study of Colorado River problems must take cognizance 
 of the necessity for river regulation on the Gila. Be it remembered that it was the 
 Gila River floods, five of them, in the winter and spring of 1905 which were responsible 
 for the great disaster of that year, when in August the whole of the river was diverted 
 into Imperial Valley. Had it not been for the continuous high water and repeated 
 floods of the Gila. the narrow cut from the temporary heading of the Imperial Canal 
 could have been closed easily. The Gila flood of January 22, 1916. was greater than 
 the highest recorded flood of the Colorado itself. River regulation of the Gila River 
 is absolutely necessary for the security of Yuma and Imperial Valleys. 
 
 About seven years ago when the Federal Government began a comprehensive study 
 of Colorado River problems, the Gila River was included in the studies. The plans 
 prepared by the United States Reclamation Service at that time provided for regula- 
 tion of the Gila by means of a dam 225 feet high near Sentinel. Ari/.. The reservoir 
 was to be operated for stream regulation only, and would have been of little service 
 in reclaiming desert lands between Sentinel and Yuma. In 1918 borings were made 
 at the dam site by the Reclamation Service, and it was ascertained that suitable 
 foundations for a storage dam do not exist, hence the Sentinel project was abandoned. 
 
 In 1920 the Reclamation Service made an extensive study of the Gila River from 
 source to mouth, examining all possible storage sites. It was concluded that the best 
 solution of water problems of the Gila River is the construction of the San Carlos Dam. 
 The report of the engineer. Mr. ( '. ( '. Fisher, favors a dam 250 feet high above bedrock, 
 about 20 feet lower than the Roosevelt Dam. Mr. Fisher finds that the irrigation 
 project should have an area of 148.000 acres. In February. 1921, a board of engineers 
 of the United States Reclamation Service reviewed the Fisher report. The board, 
 recommends that the dam to be first constructed be 200 feet in height and that in the 
 next generation. 30 years hence, the height be raised to 250 feet. The board states 
 that such a project is entirely feasible, provided satisfactory arrangements can be made 
 with the Arizona Eastern Railroad, the line of which passes through the reservoir 
 site. 
 
 The San Carlos Dam must be constructed. Furthermore, storage must be provided 
 on the Verde River. Additional storage is needed on the Salt River, and with this 
 additional storage will come 24.000 additional hydroelectric horsepower at the Horse 
 Mesa Dam. It is hoped, too, that a feasible storage project on the Agua Fria can be 
 accomplished, and perhaps the Walnut Grove Dam will be rebuilt at 'some time. 
 Each one of these projects will reduce materially the flood crests of the lower Gila 
 River.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 165 
 
 Arizona's program, therefore, should be 
 
 1. To encourage all development projects, both public and private, on the Colorado 
 River. In the case of publicly owned projects, the State must receive a block of 
 free power in lieu of taxes. 
 
 2. To demand that as much power be allotted to this State as can be used by this 
 State. 
 
 3. To demand that the Federal project include a diversion dam at Bulls Head 
 Rock at the head of Mohave Valley and one at Gatehead Rock at the head of the 
 Parker Valley. 
 
 4. To demand that provision for river regulation on the Gila River be included 
 in the Federal program. 
 
 In the above exposition of the Colorado River problems and proposals I have pre- 
 sented the case from the Arizona viewpoint. Arizona's future is to a high degree 
 wrapped up in the development of the Colorado. The highest statesmanship is de- 
 manded at this time that the latent wealth of this great ntaural resource may be wisely 
 and speedily secured and that this Commonwealth may share in its benefits in the 
 largest practicable measure. 
 
 PHOEXIX, ARIZ., May 31. 19,'.'. 
 Hon. CARL HAYDEX. 
 
 Mfmbtr of Congress. Washington. D. C. 
 
 My DEAR <'ARL: I received from vou "Power Development on the Colorado River 
 and its Relation to Irrigation and Flood Control." by E. C. Merrill, secretary of the 
 power commission. I have read this verv carefully and believe that Mr. Merrill has 
 some extremely good ideas and if he had a better knowledge of the country would 
 probably make a much better story. 
 
 I notice by this morning's paper that vou have introduced a bill asking for an 
 investigation of the Colorado River as to dikes and other river protection, especially 
 as to Arizona; that this investigation is to be made by the Army engineers. 
 
 I would suggest that you incorporate in this bill a provision for the full investigation 
 at the same time by the same engineers of the Glen Canyon Reservoir for control of 
 flood waters of the Colorado River. My own opinion from my personal study of the 
 Colorado River and its conditions is that the Glen Canyon Dam should be constructed 
 a.- a river control reservoir primarily and that the waters from the Colorado River 
 should be di si -barged from this dam from a stabilized stream which would protect all 
 of the lower country both in Arizona and in California. This would enable the con- 
 struction of the Boulder Canyon Dam at much less cost and in a much shorter time 
 than to undertake the construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam as a primary construc- 
 tion on the Colorado. 
 
 The Glen Canyon Dam should be a loose rock dam, as conditions are such that this 
 would be the most economical construction and could be more rapidly built than any 
 other type, or the construction of other dams suggested. There may be some criticism 
 as to th'e feasibility of damming the Colorado River by the blowing of the canyon walls 
 into the river and iilliuirit v ith loose rock. The greatest engineer that the ^outhv.'est, 
 has ever produced, a man \\ho had the ability to do and he did do. proved beyond a 
 possible doubt that by the mere dumping of rock into the < 'olorado River it v as possible 
 to dam the stream in material that no other dam could be constructed. This < ...s done 
 by him against the advice of the engineers of the Reclamation .-.ervice and. I beiie\e. 
 the Army engineers, and airain-t the advice of the nationally known and men of 
 national and international reputation a.s dam builders. I refer to the \\dnderful feat 
 of Col. Epes Randolph in building a dam a- TOSS the Colorado River \\hen it .-as run- 
 ning into the Imperial Valley, by the use of loose rock only on a silt foundation and 
 in a stream that had but silt banks, and if it could be done under these condition.- ii 
 most assuredly can be done in a canvon where the depth !> bedrock is very iimiled 
 and the canyon walls are solid so there is no danger of the stream being diverted 
 around the end* of the (ills. 
 
 The topography of the Glen Canyon Reservoir is such that it would permit of the 
 construction of a discharge tunnel for the discharge of the ( 'olorado River as a st abili/ed 
 stream at a point that is far distant from the possible dam site and would interfere in 
 no way with the construction of the dam. The time limit for the construction of this 
 type of dam at this point is only limited to the time that is necessary for the construc- 
 tion ot the discharge tunnel. 
 
 That the storage waters from the Glen Canyon Dam be used in their stabilized dis- 
 charge for the generation of electricity.
 
 166 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 That the Boulder Canyon Dam be constructed primarily for an irrigation reservoir 
 to store the stabalized discharge of the Colorado River from the Glen Canyon Reservoir 
 and of an added storage capacity sufficient to store the flood waters of the Little Colo- 
 rado, the Virgin River, and other streams draining the catchment basin of the Colorado 
 River between these two points. 
 
 That the water be discharged from the Boulder Canyon Reservoir for irrigation and 
 that all the electricity possible be developed under these conditions; that is, that in 
 the wintertime, when the irrigation demands are at the minimum, that the surplus 
 stabilized stream of the Colorado River be stored in the Boulder Creek Reservoir. 
 That in the summer time, when at the peak of irrigation, that the water be discharged 
 as irrigation requirements so that the horsepower developed at this point would be 
 erratic horsepower, depending on the amount of water necessary for the irrigation of 
 two and a half million acres of land in Arizona and two and a half million acres of 
 land in California including the Imperial Valley. 
 
 That the canyon between these two reservoirs with the stabilized flow of tho 
 Colorado River be used by the construction of power dams for the generation of 
 electricity, and as the river is stabilized in its flow the electric development would b 
 constant. 
 
 I would further suggest that the Boulder Canyon Dam be used as a diversion dam. 
 That the Army engineers make a study of the possibilities of diverting the water 
 from the Boulder Canyon Dam in the neighboorhood of the 1,200 or 1,300 foot contour. 
 According to the Government contour map this could be accomplished by the driving 
 of a tunnel about a mile in length; water diverted at this elevation would be able to 
 be discharged by gravity for irrigation of the country as far east as the Buckeye country 
 on the Gila River 30 miles west of Phoenix. The Gillespie Dam could be used for 
 the diverting of the gravity water of the Colorado and the Gila Rivers, or for the 
 crossing of the Gila River by waters of the Colorado River, using an enlarged Gillespie 
 canal for the main irrigation canal on the south side of the Gila River, and this canal 
 could be extended by gravity to cover the enormous acreage on the low valleys in 
 western Maricopa and Yuma Counties, creating an empire in southwestern Arizona, 
 as gravity waters of this canal could be carried to the south of the Mohawk Mountains, 
 covering all of the Gila Bend, the Sentinel, the Stovall, and that wonderful valley 
 and mesa lying between the Mohawk and Fortuna Mountains and bringing the water 
 by <n - avity covering the entire Yuma mesa with its wonderful frost less climate. 
 
 It would permit the construction of a high-line canal from Boulder Canyon diversion 
 on the California side of the river covering a large acreage in the neighborhood of Nee- 
 dles, Calif., the entire Blythe country, going through the Chuckawalla Valley into the 
 Imperial Valley, putting the lands that lie under the 500 or 600 foot above the sea level 
 contour of the Salton Basin, under irrigation. This would mean that this high-line 
 canal would cross the "White Water River above the Palm Springs that are near the 
 Southern Pacific Railroad west of Indio and at the base of San Jacinto Mountain 
 peak. 
 
 The carrying out of this plan would eliminate the building of the proposed "all- 
 American canal : ' for the Imperial Valley with its cost of 840,000,000 and would add 
 to the California empire at least one million and a half acres of land that would not be 
 capabable of being irrigated from the waters of the Colorado River by gravity under 
 any other plan. 
 
 I do not know if the United States Senate and the United States Congress and the 
 people of the East appreciate how serious a question the Colorado River is to-day as 
 to the Imperial Valley and the Yuma project. Since the diversion of the waters of 
 the Colorado River into the Imperial Valley the floor of the Colorado River has been 
 building up an average of about 1 foot per year and to-day the river is running on the 
 top of the Hogback and is held there by dikes that have required additional height 
 of a foot a year to protect the people, the homes, the wealth, and the civilization that 
 has been created in the Salton Basin. If a complete break is made by the Colorado 
 River into the Imperial Valley it. will destroy the entire Yuma project, the Southern 
 Pacific Railroad at the Colorado River and west of it. the Laguna Dam, the irrigation 
 by gravity of the Blythe country, and all the Parker Indian Reservation, as before 
 the Salton sink is filled the erosion of the Colorado River at the Yuma Bridge will be 
 in the neighborhood of 80 feet. 
 
 It would take a book to write you a full description of the possibilities of the Colo- 
 rado River developed under this plan, but if you will take a map of Arizona and realize 
 that, the gravity waters in a high-line canal, as suggested here, will cross the Arizona & 
 California Railroad in the neighborhood of Bouse, Ariz., covering the Harqua Hala 
 Plains and tailing into the Centennial Wash that discharges its water into the Gila 
 River above the Gillespie Dam. This will give you a foundation for the studying 
 of the possibilities of this development. If there are points that you would like to
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN". 167 
 
 have more definite information on, if you will advise me I will try and give them to 
 you. It is a big question and one that to date sufficient data has not been gathered to 
 make a detailed estimate of cost or possibilities of such a scheme. 
 Thanking you for the courtesies of the past, I am, 
 Sincerely yours, 
 
 JAMES C. DOBBINS, Civil Engineer. 
 
 AN ARIZONA ENGINEER'S VIEWS OF THE COLORADO PROJECT. 
 [By A. G. McGregor, Warren, Ariz.] 
 
 The relation of the Colorado River project to mining in Arizona is well expressed 
 in the following excerpt from an address delivered on December 15 last, to the 
 Arizona Industrial Congress by Dr. L. D. Ricketts, whose first-hand knowledge of 
 Arizona's mining industry is unsurpassed. In discussing its problems, he said: 
 
 "The other and much more serious question is that of fuel. Several years ago 
 when the mining companies requested bids from California we were told by the 
 large producers that they had no fuel oil for sale, but we were fortunate enough to 
 make an advantageous contract for Mexican oil. I believe it is only a question now 
 of a few years when this commodity will become so costly that we can not afford 
 to use it. We probably can get an ini->rior coal at high cost that will be sufficient 
 for smelting purposes, but I hope we will not be obliged to use this coal for power. 
 
 "I have had the subject of power carefully canvassed.- I find that the mines and 
 smelters of the Southwest, including northern Sonora. now use about 70,000 horse- 
 power in addition to the power they recover from waste heat, and my report shows 
 that it is probable this demand will increase to over 100,000 horsepower in the next 
 four or five years. I wish most urgently to bring to your attention the fact that 
 Arizona needs cheap power and is faced with the most serious menace if it does not 
 get it. and the only source of cheap power that I know is the Colorado River. * * 
 If cheap power can be obtained in Arizona. I believe there will be an extension of 
 leaching in contradistinction to smelting, and that the refining industry and the 
 production of electrolytic copper in Arizona will become a great and important 
 industry. I have to-day able chemists at work trying to devise methods of leaching 
 certain classes of mixed and sulphide ores in order to provide in the future for con- 
 tingencies of which I speak." 
 
 Normally about 60.000 tons of ore is mined in Arizona per day. In mining and 
 smelting this amount of ore, the fuel used for power and for furnaces amounts to the 
 equivalent of about 8,000,000 barrels of oil annually. This fuel could be entirely 
 replaced and conserved for other purposes by the direct use of hydroelectric power 
 in mining op- i-ations and for electrolytic copper precipitation and electric furnace 
 smelting. There ; enough power going to waste annually in the Canyon of the 
 Colorado to replar- all the fuel now consumed in Arizona for industrial purposes 
 tenfold. 
 
 Arizona has another important interest in cheap power. Considerable land is now 
 cultivated in Arizona that receives its water for irrigation through expensive power 
 pumping from depths van-ing from 10 feet to 75 feet. With cheap powei vastly greater 
 acreages would be reclaimed in this way. The additional land to be reclaimed by 
 direct diversion from the Colorado will be small compared with the land to be re- 
 claimed through cheap power for pumping in Arizona and California. 
 
 The conditions are such that cheap power can only be obtained in the canyon 
 through enormously large developments, and herein lies the reason why all the poten- 
 tial power of the Colorado is still going to waste. For the best ultimate results from a 
 single dam in the canyon, it should have sufficient reservoir capacity back of it for 
 equalizing the flow of the river throughout the year. Such a dam at a suitable loca- 
 tion would be 500 feet high and would have a capacity of BOO. 000 horsepower. Due 
 to the fact that some time will be required after the completion of the first project to 
 develop a market for a block of power as large as 000,000 horsepower, it is difficult for 
 a private corporation, which must have interest on its r-apital from the start, to finance 
 so large a development. 
 
 DEVELOPMENT BY THE GOVERNMENT. 
 
 The Government should promptly build a dam for flood control and for equalizing 
 the flow of the river, with a view of not demanding an immediate return on the invest- 
 ment, but with the assurance it will be returned many fold, just as it had at the time 
 
 1316 22 PT 3 7
 
 168 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 of investing in the Louisiana. Alaska, and other purchases, and the Panama Canal. 
 The Government's investment in a dam is fully justified by any one of the following 
 consideration? : 
 
 (a) The removal of the flood menace to the Imperial Valley. 
 
 (b) The direct financial return in the sale of cheap power, and the industrial and 
 agricultural development that will result. 
 
 (c) The conservation of the great quantities of fuel now being consumed yearly. 
 
 THE PACT BETWEEN THE STATES OP THE COLORADO BASIN. 
 
 It is very desirable that the seven States of the basin agree as to their respective 
 rights to the use of the water of the Colorado in order to prevent future interstate 
 disputes and litigation. After a suitable storage dam is built in the canyon, I believe 
 there is no likelihood of a shortage of water in the lower States for irrigation by direct 
 diversion, for generations, if ever. I believe, however, no State should be asked to 
 subscribe to a policy that will specifically prevent its citizens from diverting water 
 from the Colorado for irrigation, as long as there is no use for the water elsewhere in 
 the basin. Also, a lower State should not be asked to subscribe to a policy that will 
 permit diversion of water on new lands in an upper State, if .such diversion will cause 
 the abandonment in a lower State of lands and homes already developed at great 
 expense. 
 
 The active opposition of the upper States can undoubtedly delay a Federal appro- 
 priation for the proposed Colorado River Dam, and make it difficult to secure. The 
 upper States, however, should not take advantage of this situation and strive to gain 
 concessions from the lower States now which are unjust and uneconomical to the best 
 interests of the people of the United States as a whole. I believe the best interests 
 of the United States as a whole is the proper criterion upon which to base a pact. 
 On this basis, I believe the use of water for power should not be given any priority 
 over the use for irrigation, at least until after the last feasible power dam is built in 
 the canyon. 
 
 ARIZONA AND CALIFORNIA. 
 
 If the proposed pact between the States proves a stumbling block or, for other 
 reasons, the Federal Government can not be induced to construct the dam promptly, 
 then the States of Arizona and California should finance the construction of the first 
 storage dam. They can be assured of an ample return, direct and indirect, on the 
 investment within a comparatively short time to justify the outlay. 
 
 The States interested will benefit so much more from the development of the 
 Colorado River than a private corporation can possibly benefit, that they should not 
 hesitate to finance the project, the burden of which will last only a comparatively 
 short time. If they will not finance the project directly themselves, then they should 
 assist private capital in every way possible to do it. 1 believe the States of Arizona 
 and California, on account of their close contact and vital interest, could probably 
 be depended upon to direct the work through the ordinary methods of handling 
 public work, more efficiently than the Federal Government. I believe, however, 
 that a better plan must be worked out for handling some of these superpower projects 
 now being discussed if the full benefits are to be derived. I believe a cooperative 
 organization of the prospective power users, who will eventually pay all the bills, 
 could be worked out that would handle such a project as effectively and as efficiently 
 as a private corporation could. 
 
 LOCATION OF THE DAM. 
 
 There are two locations for dams in the canyon having reservoir sites back of them. 
 One is at the head of the canyon, near Lees Ferry or Glen Canyon, having storage 
 capacity for about three years' average flow of the river. The other is at Boulder 
 Canyon, near the lower end of the defile, having a storage for about a year's. flow of 
 the river with the same height of dam. There are a number of good sites for power 
 dams, having little storage capacity back of them, between the upper and the lower 
 storage sites. Eventually there will be six or eight dams in the canyon, developing 
 a total of 6,000,000 horsepower. 
 
 So far most of the noise has been raised in favor of Boulder Canyon: however, from 
 every standpoint, I believe the upper site has a decided advantage: 
 
 (a) For flood control, while the upper site does not intercept the floods of several 
 small streams which would be intercepted by a dam at Boulder Canyon, the upper 
 dam with its much greater storage capacity and area, under the conditions, would 
 constitute a safer control for the extraordinary floods of the main river, which are the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 169 
 
 real menace to the Imperial Valley, and the upper larger reservoir will be none too 
 large to take care of such a flood when it comes. 
 
 (6) For reclamation there is not much choice, though on account of the wide varia- 
 tions in the total flow from year to year, the larger storage would have an advantage 
 if the lands of the basin are ever developed to the extent that there is a shortage of 
 water for irrigation in Arizona and California. On account of the very excessive cost 
 of the necessary canals in the canyon, neither dam can be used as a diversion dam for 
 irrigation. 
 
 (e) From the standpoint of power, the upper site has many important advantages 
 over the lower site. 
 
 (1) By putting the liver under control at the head of the canyon, the cost of con- 
 structing subsequent power dams below will be greatly reduced. 
 
 (2) By equalizing the flow at the head of the canyon, each 500- foot power dam below 
 will have a continuous capacity of 1,000.000 horsepower instead of only about 250.000 
 horsepower duiing the long low-water season each year, which would be the case with- 
 out the large storage above. 
 
 (3) To insure safety to the Imperial Vaile. , it will be necessary to draw down the 
 water in either reservoir each year in order to make room for the enormous June 
 floods of the river. Naturally the reservoir having the larger capacity can be safely 
 maintained at a higher head and as a consequence can be depended upon for a greater 
 power output throughout the year. 
 
 (4) On account of the wide variations in the total flow of the river from year to year, 
 the larger reservoir has a decided advantage from the standpoint of the amount of 
 power it can deliver continuously. 
 
 (5) The windings of the river above Lee's Ferry, the vertical walls 1,400 feet high, 
 and the flat at Lee's Ferry are all so related as to afford a dam and power plant that 
 is safer and less expensive to construct and one that can be operated with greater 
 comfort and satisfaction to the attendants as compared with the Boulder Canyon site. 
 
 (6) The upper reservoir and power site is closer to the great bulk of the Arizona 
 power load. 
 
 The only disadvantage Lee's Ferry has over Boulder Canyon is its greater distance 
 from the prospective power load of southern California. This is important, but due 
 to the recent developments in high voltage transmission I believe it is of much less 
 importance than was anticipated by the reclamation engineers when writing their 
 recommendations, and I believe would be readily offset by almost any one of the 
 first five advantages set forth above. 
 
 TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION. 
 
 The late distinguished engineer, Epes Randolph, who dammed the Colorado River 
 in 1907 and saved the Imperial Valley, suggested taking advantage of a means that 
 nature has so generously provided for bringing the river under control. He suggested 
 making a rock fill dam by blasting off the vertical cliffs of the canyon at a suitable site. 
 
 I believe a wide, properly constructed rock fill dam, with flattened slopes, similar 
 to the Gatun Dam at the Panama Canal, which is 1 miles long and 115 feet high, will 
 be the safest that can be devised and will withstand the changes of time with the 
 least possible danger of disaster. 
 
 I believe the feasibility of building the concrete dam at Boulder Canyon, with 
 foundations 150 feet below the water level as proposed by the reclamation engineers, 
 is not only questionable from an engineering standpoint under the adverse conditions 
 obtaining, but is a great waste of valuable time and many millions of dollars, and, 
 with the possible changes of time, may constitute a serious menace to life and prop- 
 erty below. While the rock-fill dam would not be a monument of art, it would appeal 
 to Epes Randolph as a monument of good engineering. Why shouldn't the first 
 dam on the Colorado be a "Randolph" dam? 
 
 In conclusion I wish to emphasize my contention that the location and type of 
 construction of the dam in the Colorado River are strictly engineering problems, 
 and if the Government undertakes the work, which I hope it will, promptly, those 
 questions should be settled by a proper board of engineers. 
 
 APRIL 27, 1922. 
 
 COLORADO RIVKR DEVELOPMENT ARIZONA VIEWPOINT. 
 
 [By Cleon T. Knupp, Histiec, Ariz.] 
 
 Power development on the Colorado River is a problem of immediate importance 
 to Arizona. The agricultural, industrial, and other interests of the Stale require 
 some immediate utilization of the power possibilities of the river.
 
 170 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 The people of Arizona feel a proprietorship in the Colorado River and look upon 
 it as one of the State's greatest and most important natural resources. It flows through 
 Arizona for approximately 250 miles and then for an additional 200 miles or so forms 
 the boundary between Arizona and the States of Nevada and California. Ninety per 
 cent of the water of the river that empties into the Gulf flows into Arizona at the 
 Utah line. Many thousands of acres of arid land in western Arizona can be reclaimed 
 through the construction of a large impounding reservoir on the Colorado River at 
 Boulder or Glen Canyon and placing the water on the lands by gravity flow, but it 
 is safe to say that a greater acreage of arid lands in Arizona can be reclaimed through 
 the development of cheap power from the river. In any part of Arizona not over an 
 altitude of 3,000 feet, water is easily available for reclamation purposes were cheap 
 power possible for pumping it to the surface. The agricultural interests of Arizona 
 are vitally interested in the problem. 
 
 The principal industry of Arizona is mining, which represents more than 50 per 
 cent of the assessed valuation in the State. That industry employs at least 75 per 
 cent of the employed labor in the State. Anything that aflects it reflects at once 
 upon the prosperity of the State. This has been clearly shown during the past year 
 when practically all of the mines in the State have been closed down, and thousands 
 of employees have been out of work and many in want. The mining companies have 
 emerged from the war period with high material and labor costs. The price of copper, 
 the leading metal, has fallen so low that successful operations of some properties are 
 commercially impossible. And in addition there has been practically no market for 
 copper. The mining companies use vast quantities of fuel oil. and its high cost and 
 fast diminishing supply makes it imperative that the mining interests look elsewhere 
 for a source of power. And they, like the farmers, are looking to the Colorado River. 
 But not 15 or 20 years from now, but at once. Cheap power under present operating 
 conditions may prove to be the determining factor, as to whether or not certain pro- 
 perties can operate. And power 35 years from now will not help those mines that will 
 become exhausted before that time. So it would seem safe to say that the problem 
 of the mining industry, in this respect, is likewise the problem of the State. There 
 are, of course, the usual municipalities that would receive the beneficial results 
 from any power development on the Colorado River. And it is quite probable that 
 manufacturing interests would be at once attracted to Arizona as a field for operations, 
 through the inducement of cheap power. Even copper, which is now shipped East, 
 might be refined in Arizona. The possibilities are great, and the problem is one that 
 is of immediate importance to Arizona and its prosperity. 
 
 GIRAND PROJECT. 
 
 Fortunately for Arizona a power project is proposed to be immediately developed 
 on the Colorado River at Diamond Creek. This is known as the Girand project, 
 application No. 121, before the Federal Power Commission. This is solely a power 
 project, with a limited storage capacity, and no water will or could be taken from the 
 river. James B. Girand, of Phoenix, Ariz., in November. 1913, filed application for 
 this power project with the Secretary of the Interior under the then existing law. 
 He was the first to visualize the possibilities and to act upon his faith and judgment. 
 In May, 1915, the Secretaries of Interior and Agriculture issued a preliminary permit 
 to Girand. In May, 1920, and before the enactment of the present Federal power 
 act, Girand filed his application for a final power permit. The filing was made with 
 the Secretary of the Interior, and was accepted as being in due and proper form. 
 During all the years intervening between 1913 and 1920 Girand complied with all 
 the requirements of the law, and with such limited capital as he commanded, pre- 
 served his legal rights, in spite of obstacles that would have discouraged many. Dur- 
 ing that period he expended approximately $75,000 to protect his legal rights and to 
 furnish the data and maps required under the law. 
 
 In June, 1920, and before Girand's application for a final permit was acted upon 
 by the Interior Department, Congress enacted the present Federal power act. Girand, 
 at the suggestion of the Federal Power Commission, thereupon transferred his applica- 
 tion and files from the Interior Department to the Federal Power Commission, in 
 December, 1920. In June, 1921, the Federal Power Commission issued a preliminary 
 permit to Girand, and asked for further data and information. The preliminary 
 permit provides in article 4 that a license will be issued to Girand when it appears 
 that his scheme of development is adaptable to the best utilization of the site. Girand, 
 relying upon that assurance and the terms of the preliminary permit of June. 1921, 
 thereupon expended approximately $25,000 additional to furnish the further data 
 requested by the Federal Power Commission. In February, 1922, Girand filed that 
 data and maps, and made application for a license. It is now pending before the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 171 
 
 Federal Power Commission, and Girand is asking for immediate action. He has the 
 necessary financial support to develop this project. Its development will come at 
 once and bring to Arizona the power which will answer the imperative needs of the 
 agricultural, industrial, and municipal interests. Arizona needs this and wants it 
 now. 
 
 The Girand project will not interfere with any flood control, reclamation or power 
 project on the Colorado River. It will help the flood control to the extent of its limited 
 reservoir capacity. It can not affect reclamation, because no water can I e taken 
 from the river at this site. All water impounded must flow through or over the dam, 
 and therefore the water supply is not diminished one drop. The development of 
 power at the Girand project would be helpful in the event of Government construc- 
 tion at Boulder Canyon, through power that could be furnished during the construc- 
 tion period at Boulder Canyon, and in the regulation of the flow of the river. 
 
 Girand claims that under the law and the terms of his preliminary permit, that he 
 is legally entitled to a license now. In other words, that the Federal Power Commis- 
 sion has no alternative but to issue the license. We confidently assert that such must 
 be the legal interpretation of the law. Girand, for eight years, has complied with 
 every requirement of the law and of the Secretary of the Interior and Federal Power 
 Commission, with the asurance and distinct understanding that a license would be 
 isued to him. His preliminary permit is an agreement signed by both Girand and the 
 Federal Power Commission, setting forth the terms upon which the license would be 
 issued. Girand has complied with those terms. He has expended approximately 
 $100,000 and given years of his time, to comply with the conditions imposed upon 
 him by the Government, under an agreement that by so doing the Government would 
 issue him a license. It would seem clear that the Government is both legally and 
 morally bound to do so. 
 
 FACTORS DELAYING LICENSE. 
 
 The Colorado River Commission is composed of a representative from each of the 
 seven basin States, with Secretary Hoover as chairman. Under the laws creating 
 the commission, it is designed to arrive at an agreement among the seven basin States 
 of the Colorado River, allocating the waters of the river. It has no jurisdiction over 
 power projects solely. After Girand filed his application for a license on February 
 27, 1;)22. with the Federal Power Commission, a letter was written by the Federal 
 Power Commission to the Colorado River Commission asking if there were any objec- 
 tions to the issuance of the Girand license. Chairman Hoover and several members 
 of the Colorado River Commission had no hesitancy in stating that in their opinion 
 the Colorado River Commission had no jurisdiction over the Girand project as it was 
 solely a power project. At a meeting of the Colorado River Commission held in 
 Phoenix, Ariz., on March 15, 1922. the commission took action upon the letter of the 
 Federal Power Commission and held that it had no objection to the issuance of the 
 Girand license. A formal letter, however, has not yet been filed with the Federal 
 Power Commission so advising. The failure to file such letter is holding up action 
 by the Federal Power Commission. 
 
 Shortly after March 15, 1922, a purported interview with Arthur P. Davis, chief of 
 the Government Reclamation Service, appeared in certain Los Angeles papers, to 
 the effect that the construction of the Girand project would kill the proposed Govern- 
 ment construction at Boulder Canyon, which Mr. Davis has so strongly urged. The 
 reason given was that the (iirand project would sell power to the prospective customers 
 of the Government, should it eventually build at Boulder Canyon; Boulder Canyon 
 is situated on the river touching Nevada. There has never been any claim that from 
 an engineering or physical standpoint the Girand project would interfere with the 
 Boulder Canyon project. On the contrary, it would be helpful. The Girand project 
 would, from an engineering and physical standpoint, be helpful in at leant two ways. 
 It would regulate the flow of the river, and could furnish power to Boulder Canyon 
 during its construction period. Now. forgetting for the moment lhal Girand. under 
 the law and his preliminary permit, is legally entitled to a license now. is ihe position 
 taken by Mr. Davis, either fair or sound? Should a man who has proceeded in good 
 faith: who has given years of his life and a large sum of money in acquiring and pre- 
 serving certain water-power rights, be deprived of those rights arbitrarily and without 
 legal reason or justification? Should he be denied that to which he 'is legally and 
 morally entitled, for the reason, as Mr. Davis advances, that he might be a power 
 competitor of the Government? It has not been determined that a dam can be built 
 at Boulder Canyon. It has not been determined that Congress will appropriate 
 money for such construction. But assuming both facts, are they sufficient reason for 
 denying to Girand the legal rights he has been assured were his? In ihe lirst place, 
 it is Girand who should be most fearful of competition with the Government.
 
 172 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 If the theory of public ownership adherents is correct, the Government utility can 
 always undersell the privately conducted utility. Girand would be required to pay 
 State and Federal taxes, amounting annually to hundreds of thousands of dollars. He 
 would pay an annual fixed fee to the Federal Power Commission. It would seem that 
 not the Government, but Girand, should fear competition. But if the danger lies 
 in Girand taking the market away from the Government before Boulder Canyon is 
 constructed, then all applications for licenses now pending before the Federal Power 
 Commission, covering projects in Southern California, should likewise be denied, for 
 the reason that such projects, if developed, would be brought into competition with 
 the Government. The unfairness of such a position, aside from Girand 's vested 
 rights, is obvious. Girand has no objection to construction at Boulder Canyon. He 
 is in favor of any construction there or elsewhere that will be helpful to flood control 
 and reclamation. It is quite probable that many years will elapse before Congress 
 will appropriate the necessary money or construction will begin at Boulder Canyon. 
 Arizona can not wait. Arizona wants the Girand license issued now. 
 
 SWING-JOHNSON BILL. 
 
 A bill was recently introduced in the House and Senate known as the Swing-Johnson 
 bill. It. proposes an appropriation of $70,000.000 for the construction at Boulder 
 Canyon, together with certain canals . But the bill further provides that the GoA'ern- 
 ment shall reserve to itself the exclusive right to construct, provide and control dams, 
 reservoirs or diversion works on the Colorado River below the mouth of the Green 
 River. As the Green River is north of Arizona in Utah, this would mean that if 
 Arizona is ever to obtain any benefits from the Colorado River, through development 
 of power or otherwise, she must depend solely upon the Government to provide same. 
 In other words, this bill proposes that never at any time, or at any place within the 
 State of Arizona, can any private utility company develop power on the Colorado 
 River. Just why the States of Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and other States to the 
 north, should be left free to obtain any power development or other beneficial con- 
 struction on the Colorado River and Arizona be denied the same right, is not clear. 
 Obviously the discrimination is unfair. From the Arizona viewpoint competition is 
 to be desired. Arizona interests will best be served through competition, rather 
 than through a monopoly of the river by either the Government or private capital. 
 
 Arizona does not propose to he deprived of any of its rights in or to the Colorado 
 River. The Swing-Johnson bill discriminates against Arizona. Arizona is in favor 
 of Government construction at Boulder or Glen Canyon, but it is also in favor of 
 private utility construction. The Girand project is ready to proceed. It will in- 
 crease the taxable wealth of Arizona about $40,000,000 and mean hundreds of thou- 
 sands of dollars annually in taxes to the State and county. Government construction 
 will mean nothing in taxes. The Girand project will provide employment within 
 the reasonably immediate future to many people. There is no assurance that the 
 Government will ever construct at Boulder Canyon, or, if so, for years. The Girand 
 means immediate power for Arizona interests. There is no legal or logical reason for 
 delayin^ the issuance of the Girand license. Arizona asks that it be issued at once. 
 
 MAY 18, 1922. 
 
 TENTATIVE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 789-FooT ROCK-FILL DAM ON THE 
 COLORADO RIVER AT LEE FERRY, ARIZ. 
 
 [By E. C. La Rue, Hydraulic Engineer, U. S. Geological Survey.] 
 SYNOPSIS. 
 
 It is proposed to build a rock-fill dam in a narrow canyon of the Colorado River by 
 blasting in the canyon walls. The dam described in this paper was designed to raise 
 the water 700 feet above the bed of the river. Both the height of the dam and the 
 plan suggested for its construction are unique features. The walls of the canyon rise 
 1,300 feet above the river, and the width of the canyon at the water surface is 450 feet. 
 
 During the past six years the writer had has in mind the plan herein outlined for 
 the construction of such a dam. As a dam of this type may be built on the Lower 
 Colorado within the next year or two, it is believed that the presentation of this paper 
 at this time will be of interest to many engineers. There may be a difference of 
 opinion as to the feasibilitv of the plan as presented. Some engineers may have 
 studied this problem carefully, but to the writer's knowledge no one has ever made 
 the results of his studies available to the engineering profession. It is hoped that 
 engineers will present their views in the form of constructive criticism of this paper.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 173 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 In the southwestern part of the United States the demand for power is increasing 
 rapidly. In California alone construction plans which call for the expenditure of 
 several hundred million dollars have been adopted for the development of hydro- 
 electric power. As a result of these plans the ultimate development of the power 
 resources of the Sierra Nevada and Coast Range Mountains, in the southern part of 
 California, is in sight. 
 
 The construction of high rock-fill dams by blasting down the towering canyon 
 walls has been suggested in connection with the studies of both power and irrigation 
 development. This paper deals primarily with the practicability of constructing 
 such a dam in the Colorado River. A particular site (Lee Ferry) has been chosen 
 in order that the discussion might be based on definite dimensions. It should not 
 be construed, however, as advocating this or any other specific project. 
 
 COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 General features. The Colorado River is formed by the junction of the Green and 
 Grand Rivers in southeastern Utah. The combined length of the Green and the 
 Colorado is 1,700 miles and the total fall is about 14,000 feet. 
 
 The Colorado River and its tributaries drain an area of 244,000 square miles. This 
 area comprises the southweastern part of Wyoming, the eastern half of Utah, the 
 western part of Colorado, practically all of Arizona, and small parts of California, 
 Nevada, New Mexico, and Mexico. 
 
 The water resources of the Colorado River Basin are enormous. About 14,000,000 
 acre-feet of water is wasted annually into the Gulf of California. Practically all this 
 water could be used for irrigation and, in addition, a large amount of hydroelectric 
 power could be developed. In order to utilize fully the water resources of the Colorado 
 River Basin the flow must be regulated to meet the demands for both irrigation and 
 power. The storage of the flood waters would serve a threefold purpose: Water would 
 be available for irrigation when needed; the possibilities for the development of 
 hydroelectric power would be greatly increased; and with the ravaging floods under 
 control property on the lower river, exceeding 100,000,000 in value, would be safe. 
 
 Storage-reservoir sites. A comprehensive plan for the development of the water 
 resources of the Colorado River Basin will undoubtedly call for the utilization of 
 most of the reservoir sites mentioned in Table 1 . 
 
 TABLE 1. Storage-reservoir sites in the Colorado River Basin. 
 
 Name. 
 
 Stream. 
 
 Height of 
 dam, 
 In feet.' 
 
 Capacity, 
 in 
 acre-feet. 
 
 Flaming Gorge 
 Junipor Canyon 
 Ourav 
 
 Green River, Utah-Wyo 
 Yampa River, Colo 
 
 255 
 200 
 300 
 
 4, 720, 000 
 1,400,000 
 28 000 000 
 
 KremmliDg 
 
 Grand River. Colo . . 
 
 230 
 
 2 200 000 
 
 Howey 
 Green-Grand 
 
 Grand Kiver, Utah 
 
 .Junction of Green and Grand Kivers, Utah 
 
 213 
 
 270 
 
 2, .100, 000 
 8, 600, 000 
 
 Blufl 
 
 San .1 nun River, Utah 
 
 264 
 
 2 600 000 
 
 Lee Forrv 
 
 Colorado and San Juan It Ivors, Utah- Vriz. 
 
 700 
 
 - 50 000 000 
 
 Boulder Canvon 
 
 Colorado River, Nev.- Ariz 
 
 600 
 
 31,600 000 
 
 
 
 
 
 ' The figures in this column indicate the elevation of spillway above river bed. 
 
 ! Ksiimalo.l. 
 
 These storage sites and their use were discussed in the writer's report on the "Colo- 
 River and its utilization." (Water Supply Paper No. :<!);">. l'nit'd Suites < ieological 
 Survey, 191(5.) An analysis was made of the records of stream (low, and the mass 
 curves indicated that the flow of the Lower Colorado could be equalized if properly 
 located reservoir sites having an aggregate storage capacity of 25,000,000 acre-feet 
 were utilized. This study also indicated that, if no allowance is made for evapora- 
 tion from the surface of these reservoirs, a uniform flow of 21,800 second-feet could be 
 maintained below the San Juan River. The irrigation of additional lands in the 
 upper basin would further reduce the quantity for the uniform flow that might be 
 maintained by storage. 
 
 Undeveloped iratcr /)or/- hi'turen Green River and Roulder Camion. In the (i7() miles 
 between the town of (Jreen Kiver. Utah, and Boulder Canyon, Nev.-Ariz., the fall is 
 about 3,350 feet. As this part of the Colorado and that part of (irand River below 
 the elevation of th e town of Green River are in practically a continuous canyon, the
 
 174 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 use of the water for irrigation v ithin tin's stretch is impossible, but conditions are 
 favorable for the regulation of flo :id for the development of power. 
 
 The entire regulated :'o- might prof tably be used for the irrigation of extensive areas 
 of arable land 'tu;ited belo" - Boulder ('an von. 
 
 The data now available indir-ate that the water-power r< : the 070 miles of 
 
 the river between Green River and Boulder ( anyon may be utilized by developing 
 five projects. 
 
 Orecn-^nrnd projer'. A 170-foot dam built on the Colorado River immediately 
 below the mouth of < K-en River would make possible the development of J10>000 
 horsepower. The capacitv of this pr ( > r e<-T for power ma-- be L'n-atly Li hen 
 
 the flow of the Green and C^rand Pi dated by addii i pper 
 
 basin of these str> 
 
 Lrc Ferrti project. BY building a dam at I.ee Ferry to raise the water 700 feet 
 1, COO. COO horsepower may re develc 
 
 fe Canyon proj.Tt. A spuming that the f r ; - er is regulated by storage 
 
 above, it mav prove feasible to develop norsepower between Lee Ferry and 
 
 the ^ estern boundary of the Grand Canvon National Park. 
 
 ff-t. Between the western boundary of the Grand Canv..n 
 
 v ational Park and Diamond Creek the Colorado River falls oOO feet. This part of the 
 river may be developed by building two dams, each dam to raise the water 250 feet. 
 The capacity of this project would be 830,000 horsepower if the flow of the ri\ 
 regulated by storage above. 
 
 BouMfr < :med that at Boulder Canyon the flow will be 
 
 reregulated to meet the demand for water lor irrigation. Under this condition a 
 dam 550 feet high will make possible the development oi" 700,000 horsepov. er. 
 
 More than 4.000. GOO continuous horsepower may be developed between Gieen River 
 and Boulder Canvon. The aggregate installed capacity of the power plants would 
 probably be more than 5,000,000 horsepower. 
 
 THE LEE FERRY PROJECT. 
 
 Eight miles above I ee Ferry, Ariz., is a site which has been selected as particularly 
 favorable for both the regulation of flow and the development of power, the possibilities 
 of which vill be disclosed by the surveys and investigations now in pr<x 
 
 Present information indicates that to construct a 780-foot dam at the Lee Ferry 
 site may prove feasible. A dam of this height would form a reservoir with a capacity 
 of about 50,000.000 acre-feet. The maximum back water would extend upstream 
 nearly to the junction of the Green and Grand Rivers and to within 230 feet of the 
 elevation of the piers of the railroad bridge near Green River. Utah. 
 
 The capacity of the upper 100 feet of the Lee Ferry Reservoir would be about 
 20,000.000 acre-feet. Allowing for evaporation from the reservoirs and for the use of 
 water in the upper basin for the irrigation of additional lands, the 20.000,000 acre- 
 feet of storage capacity may be sufficient to equalize the flow through the canyons 
 of the lower river. With a* 100-foot drawdown, the average head available at Lee 
 Ferry for power would be about 650 feet, and with the flow of the river equalized at 
 this point, power plants in the canyon below could be operated under heads almost 
 equal to the full height of the respective dams. The dam farthest downstream, how- 
 ever, should provide sufficient storage capacity to regulate the flow to conform to the 
 demand for irrigation. Under these conditions, it seems probable that an aggregate 
 effective head of 2.800 feet may be utilized out of the 3,350 feet of fall between Green 
 River. Utah, and Boulder Canyon. 
 
 The mean annual flow at Lee Ferry has been about 15.000.000 acre-feet, but allowing 
 for the reduction in flow for ultimate irrigation development in the upper basin, 
 this quantity may be reduced to 10.000.000 acre-feet. It may be 50 years before 
 ultimate irrigation development in the upper basin is reached. To assume that a 
 uniform flow of about 19.300 second-feet can be maintained at the Lee Ferry site 
 and in the canyons below would seem reasonable. 
 
 The depth to bedrock at the dam site has not been determined, but the writer 
 believes that rock is near the surface in the river channel. When he examined this 
 part of the river in August. 1915. the river was at a very low stage, and downstream, 
 about 8 miles from the Lee Ferry Dam site, the bedrock appeared to extend across 
 the channel of the Colorado River at the surface. 
 
 At the dam site the red sandstone walls of the canyon rise 1,300 feet above the river, 
 and the width of the canyon at the water surf act is 450 feet. The course of the river 
 at this point is in the form of the letter s> thus making two spillway sites available. 
 By constructing tunnels through Jhe bluff, the water may be carried about 3.000 feet 
 to a forebay and power house which is 6 miles by river from the dam site. The site 
 is easily accessible by automobile and a railroad could be built at a comparatively 
 low cost, connecting with the nearest railroad point. Flagstaff. Ariz.. 133 miles to the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BAS1X. 175 
 
 south. After considering the conditions at the dam site, the facilities for spillways, 
 site for power house and auxiliary structures, storage capacity above the dam. and 
 the accessibility of the project, the writer believes the Lee Ferry site to be one of 
 tli" most promising on the Colorado River below the junction of the Green and Grand 
 Rivers. 
 
 Should this project be developed, water would be available for irrigation on the 
 lower river for at least a generation to come, and the menace from floods would be 
 removed (except floods from the Gila River) . 
 
 The conditions favor the construction of a 780-foot dam of the rock-fill type. Al- 
 though such a high rock-till dam has never been constructed, the writer believes that 
 one can be built at this site and made practically water-tight at a much less cost than 
 any other type of dam. 
 
 ']', nt(iti;< design for rock-fill flam. In designing a rock-fill dam for the Lee Ferry 
 site a slope of 3:1 was used for the upstream face, for the downstream face 6:1 was used 
 to the 300-foot level, and 4:1 for the remainder. The rock for the dam can be blasted 
 from the canyon walls. With this plan of construction the slopes of the finished dam 
 would be uneven. but the writer believes that the general slope of both faces of the 
 finished dam should not be greater than those mentioned. 
 
 It is assumed that lied rock lies at a depth of 100 feet below the bed of the river, that 
 the channel is iilled Avith line sand and silt to a depth of 60 feet, and that the next 40 
 feet is composed of sand and bowlders. If the canyon walls were blasted into the 
 river, the heavy mass of material would settle to the level of the bowlders assumed to 
 be 60 feet below the bed of the river, and some of the fine sand and silt would be forced 
 up. Under these conditions the finished dam would contain 50,000,000 cubic yards 
 of material. The center 50-foot section of the dam would contain about 1,000,000 
 cubic yards. 
 
 Prior to construction the outline for the dam could be plainly marked on the canyon 
 walls. A plan for mining both walls of the canyon could be worked out from detailed 
 topography of the site of the dam. To obtain 500,000 cubic yards of rock from each 
 wall for the center 50-foot section of the dam, it would be necessary to blast the wails 
 back on a slope slightly steeper than 2:1, and here it may be necessary to rehandle 
 some of the material. Up and down stream from the center 50-foot section of the dam 
 the walls of the canyon may be blasted from a lower level, and the required quantity 
 of material obtained by blasting back on a much steeper slope. The space occupied 
 by the loose rock in the dam will be about 15 per cent greater than the space occupied 
 by the same material in its natural compact state. If the mines are propeily placed 
 in both walls of the canyon the first shot will blow enough rock into the river to form 
 a dam 250 feet high, having a gradual slope to the lower toe, more than a mile down- 
 stream. 
 
 The discharge of the river may be expected to range from 4,000 to 10,000 second-feet 
 during the eight months following the flood period. Perhaps 50 per cent of the ma- 
 terial in the dam would consist of rock weighing from 1 ton to 1,000 tons. If the un- 
 expected should happen, and a flood of 100,000 second-feet should pass over the un- 
 finished dam, some of the material might be moved downstream. The unfinished 
 dam would have a slope of about 5 per cent and the bed over which the flood would 
 pass would be rough. Under these conditions the water, 8 feet in depth, might 
 attain a velocity of 30 feet per second. Since weight of bodies that can be moved by 
 a current varies as the sixth power of the velocity, such a flood would have an enor- 
 mous ability for destmction. The lighter materials would be carried downstream 
 and rock that could withstand the force of the water would settle. However, floods 
 which occur outside the normal flood period last only a few days. To believe that 
 after the flood the unfinished dam would retain a height of 100 feet or more above the 
 average low water level seems more reasonable than that all of it would be carried 
 away. Such a flood might prove to be a blessing in disguise, since that part of the 
 dam remaining would form a solid foundation on which to build the superstructure. 
 
 However, flood water should not be permitted to flow over the dam, and it is sug- 
 gested that no material be blasted into the river until a temporary spillway has been 
 provided 200 feet above the bed of the river. A spillway tunnel would be about 
 3,000 feet long and could be given a fall of 200 feet. A spillway tunnel, 30 feet in 
 diameter, with a properly designed entrance, would have approximately the follow- 
 ing capacity: 
 
 Elevation of water above Capacity, in 
 
 gate sill, in feet: second-feet. 
 
 
 
 10 5,000 
 
 20 13,500 
 
 Elevation of water above 
 gate sill, in feet: 
 
 60 38,200 
 
 70 42,000 
 
 80... . 45,000 
 
 30 22,500 ! 90 47,400 
 
 40 28,500 j 100 50.000 
 
 50 33,700
 
 170 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 With the spillway completed and the flood stage passed, the mines may be dis- 
 charged and about. 20,000,000 cubic yards of rock would be blown into the river. 
 This mass of loose rock would not be water-tight, which feature is the most uncertain 
 in the plan here presented. 
 
 This mass of rock, weighing about 40,000,000 tons, would displace the fine sand and 
 silt and would tend to form a mud bank immediately upstream from the dam. Such 
 a mud bank would be practically water-tight and, until overtopped, it would cut off 
 the flow of the river. This material might make the rock fill water-tight to an eleva- 
 tion of 50 to 100 feet above the bed of the river, and thus form a reservoir having a 
 storage capacity of from 100,000 to 700,000 acre-feet. If the flow of the river was 
 5,000 second-feet, the supply of water for irrigation might be cut off for a period of 
 from 10 to 70 days. 
 
 Water for the irrigation of more than 400,000 acres of land on the Lower Colorado 
 must be available each month of the year. To cut off the supply of water for the 
 irrigation of these lands, even for a 10-day period, might result in serious damage to 
 crops. An understanding should be had with the irrigation interests in order that they 
 mav take proper steps to protect the crops, should the supply of water lie cut off. 
 
 Therefore, unless a temporary spillway is provided at an elevation of 50 feet above 
 low water, it will be necessary to discharge the mines when the river is in flood so 
 that the storage reservoir above the dam may be quickly filled, and permit the 
 water to flow either through the upper part of the unfinished dam or through a tem- 
 porary spillway located at the 200-foot level. The writer believes that the temporary 
 spillway should be located at the 200-foot level and that the mines should be dis- 
 charged after the peak of the summer flood, when the discharge has fallen to about 
 50.000 second-feet. This feature of the project deserves consideration, and a thorough 
 study of the stream-flow records should be made to determine the proper time for 
 the first discharge of the mines. 
 
 Practically all the rock fill can be blasted into place, thus making it unnecessary 
 to rehandle the material except for finishing a small section at the top of the dam. 
 The 50.000,000 cubic yards of rock could probably be blasted into pi. -i <>f 
 
 10 cents or less per cubic yard. To determine the quantity of fine material necessary 
 to make the rock fill water-tight would be difficult, hut the writer believes that 
 about 10.000.000 cubic yards of fine rock, sand, and silt would be required. 
 
 The upper face of the dam would be permanently submerged to the 600-foot 
 level, and. therefore, below this level no protection against wave action is necessary. 
 The water in the reservoir would fluctuate between the 600 and 700 foot levels. The 
 reservoir would be located in a deep box canyon the circuitous course of which would 
 prevent excessive wave action. On the upper face of the dam. above the 600-foot 
 level, rock 2 feet in diameter should probably be placed. This section will be wet 
 and dry periodically and will require care in its construction if the back fill is to 
 be kept water-tight. 
 
 Making the rock fill water-tight. Several methods have been used in the past to 
 make rock-fill dams water-tight, but most of these methods appear unsatisfactory 
 when applied to such a high dam. 
 
 A concrete core wall extending to bedrock is often used. If this plan were adopted 
 at the Lee Ferry Dam site, it would be necessary to excavate the river channel to 
 bedrock. To take care of the flood water during the period when the core wall is 
 being built from bedrock to the former water surface would be both hazardous and 
 expensive. For such a high dam there would be danger of the core wall becoming 
 fractured on account of uneven forces being exerted by the rock fill. 
 
 A steel core, having a concrete base, would be even more objectionable than a con- 
 crete core, for besides requiring a concrete facing to prolong its life, it would have 
 all the objectionable features of the concrete core. 
 
 The rock fill might be made water-tight by lining the upstream face of the dam 
 with concrete, but it would be necessary either to carry this concrete faring to bed- 
 rock or to provide an impervious base for the dam with a series of cut-off walls. 
 Otherwise, the water would pass under the concrete facing and undermine the dam. 
 In addition to these odjectionable features, the settlement of the rock fill would 
 make it almost impossible to prevent the concrete facing from becoming fractured. 
 
 The writer believes that with the river under control the rock fill can be made 
 water-tisrht by sluicing fine material into the dam. 
 
 The discharge of the river ranges from 4.000 to 10.000 second-feet after the flood 
 period. This quantity of water might find its way through the rock till. At this 
 stage of construction every attention should be given to the work of making the 
 rock fill water-tight. It would be necessary to place fine material on the upper face 
 and perhaps as far down stream as the center of the finished dam. This material 
 should be graded in size from that which would pass through a 1-inch to a 6-inch 
 mesh. On the right bank of the river, a few hundred feet upstream from the upper
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 177 
 
 toe of the dam. there is a talus which could be moved to the dam at a low cost. The 
 back water above the dam might have a depth of from 75 to 100 feet and would extend 
 up the river a distance of at least 25 miles. 
 
 Assuming that the rock rill rises 250 feet above the bed of the river, and that there 
 is 100 feet of water above the dam, the flow of water through the dam would be as 
 follows: The water would rush through the open spaces between the large rocks. 
 flow through the spaces between the smaller rocks, percolate through the sand, and 
 seep through the clay or fine silt. The rush of water through the spaces between 
 the large rocks would be partly stopped by the coarser material that is. the rock 
 (i inches in diameter; and the flow through the spaces between the smaller rocks 
 would be partly stopped by the finer material that is, rock that would pass the 1, 
 2. 3, or 4 inch mesh. Large quantities of sand may then be deposited on the upper 
 face of the dam. Due to the flow of water under high pressure, this sand would 
 be carried into the dam. The deposit of fine clay or silt on the upstream face and 
 on top of the dam should produce a practically water-tight structure. Owing to 
 the enormous pressure, water would always seep through the dam but probably 
 not in quantities sufficient to cause erosion. 
 
 When, in 1915. the writer made a trip by boat through 150 miles of the canyon 
 of the Colorado River between Hite, Utah, and Lee Ferry, Ariz., large silt deposits 
 at the mouth of Xavajo Creek were observed. This creek joins the Colorado from 
 the south, at a point about 18 miles upstream from the site of the Lee Ferry Dam. 
 Large silt deposits also were observed at many other points in the canyon below 
 the mouth of San Juan River. These deposits could be located before they are cov- 
 ered with the back water, and as the water reached the respective deposits, the 
 material could be loaded on barges by dipper or suction dredges. It might prove 
 more economical, however, to place rock crushers on the plateau above the dam 
 and transport the crushed material to the dam by chutes. It is thus seen that there 
 is plenty of accessible material for use in the final process of making the rock fill 
 water-tight. 
 
 When the rock fill becomes water-tight and the reservoir fills, the water may per- 
 colate through the 40-foot layer of sand and bowlders. This water would be forced 
 to travel a distance of about 5,700 feet. The indicated hydraulic gradient is about 
 1:8, and the .writer believes that the frictional resistance to the passage of water 
 through the 40-foot layer of sand and bowlders would be sufficient to consume the 
 head of 700 feet before the lower toe of the dam is reached, in which case the velocity 
 of the percolating water near the lower toe of the dam would not erode the founda- 
 tion. Under these conditions the dam as designed would be safe against blowouts 
 caused by the upward hydrostatic pressure of the percolating water on the base of 
 the dam. 
 
 It is said that the silt-laden waters of the Colorado would be sufficient to tighten the 
 dam. This silt, however, would be deposited at the head of the back water and not 
 at the dam, which condition favors the completed project. With reservoir full, the 
 back water would extend up every side canyon and tributary of the Colorado, and 
 would probably extend up the San Juan River, a distance of 80 miles or more. 
 The San Juan, which carries a large quantity of silt, would have its own stilling basin 
 and. perhaps, 100 years would pass before the silt would reach the canyon of the 
 Colorado. As each side canyon would have its own stilling basin, the water in the 
 main canyon of the Colorado above the dam would remain practically clear. This is 
 important when it is considered that the water is to be used for the development of 
 power. 
 
 Since it is proposed to blast about 20.000,000 cubic yards of rock into the river 
 channel wiih the lirst discharge of the mines, arch action may result when this enor- 
 mous quantity of material falls into the canyon, thus leaving a large open space 
 within the proposed dam. Although such arch action is only a remote possibility, it 
 might be advisable to discharge the mines in both walls of the canyon at the same 
 instant, so that much of the material may meet over the river channel and fall ver- 
 tically. Perhaps better results can he obtained by discharging the mines in one wall, 
 after those in the other wall, but the writer believes it is impossible to determine just 
 how the roc'k will fall when the mines are discharged. 
 
 Care of inili-r //urini/ ctitixtrdction.The writer I, Sieves it imm-fessary to have the 
 river under control until the dam is raised to an elevation 250 feet or more above the 
 bed of the river. If the mines were discharged immediately after the flood period has 
 passed, at least eight months would elapse under normal conditions before the river 
 would again be at flood stage. During these eight months, it is expected that the 
 upper face of the dam can be raised 100 feet, or to an elevation of 350 feet above the 
 bed of the river. The storage capacity of the reservoir between an elevation of 200 
 and 350 feet is about 8,000,000 acre-feet.
 
 178 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 The writer has described (Engineering News-Record. March 6. 1919) the flood of 
 1917. during which the peak at Lee Ferry was about 147.000 second-feet, one of the 
 highest floods of record originating above that site. An analysis of the records of 
 daily discharge for this flood period shows that the water level in the Lee Ferry 
 Reservoir would have been raised from an elevation of 215 feet to an elevation of 
 332 feet above the bed of the river. The accumulated storage above the 200-foot level 
 would have been about 7.300 000 acre-feet and the total volume discharged through 
 the temporary spillway would have been nearly 7.500.000 acre-feet. It is seen, 
 therefore, that in order to prevent such a flood overtopping the unfinished dam. it 
 would have been necessary to raise the dam at least 332 feet above the bed of the 
 river. For the plan of construction herein presented the writer believes that the most 
 dangerous period would be that during which the dam is being raised from the 200 
 to 350 foot level. Luring this period, it may be necessary to take care of a summer 
 flood such as that which occurred in 1917. 
 
 The water level in the reservoir during construction might be controlled most 
 economically and efficiently by constructing only one tempoiary spillway at the 200- 
 foot level controlled by a Johnson valve having a capacity of 60.000 second-feet 
 under a static head of ICO feet. As this spillway is to be used only during construc- 
 tion, it would not be necessary to provide slide gate? so that the Johnson valve may 
 be unwatered for inspection and repairs. If a summer flood, such as that which 
 occurred in 1917. miist be taken care of when the dam is nearing the 300-foot level, 
 the temporary spillway will be taxed to its maximum capacity of 60,000 second-feet. 
 As the dam is raised aJ-ove the 300-foot level, the storage capacity of the reservoir 
 becomes much greater, so that a spillway capacity of lew than 60.000 second-feet 
 would be required. Under this plan, the dam could be built to its full height without 
 fear of its being overtopped by a flood during construction. 
 
 The tunnels leading to the power house may be located at the 600-foot level. Since 
 this paper deals primarily with the design of a rock-fill dam. no attempt will be made 
 to determine the most feasible location for the power tunnels. 
 
 The summer floods are caused by the melting snows in Colorado. Utah, and Wyom- 
 ing. From the records cf precipitation, the volume of t,he coming summer flood can 
 be determined with fair accuracy 60 days in advance. A permanent spillway should 
 be provided at the 600-foot level so that the water level in the reservoir ciay be drawn 
 down to provide sufficient capacity to take care of a flood much greater than any 
 heretofore recorded. 
 
 These in charge of the operation of the reservoir would be more concerned with the 
 volume of run-off than with the magnitude of the flood peak. The quantity of snow 
 in the upper basin would indicate whether the expected run-off would be high, low, 
 or average in volume, ^n extended period of high temperatures, accompanied by a 
 warm rain or "chinook" wind, would cai se a flood of great magnitude but of short 
 duration. It would be impossible to predict such conditions 60 days in advance, 
 but a study of the run-off records for the past 20 years would afford a fairly accurate 
 basis for a prediction as to the time the summer flood may be expceted. 
 
 Pout vnstrtietion. As coal is abundant within 15 miles from the site, a 
 
 steam plant could be built to furnish powfr during construction. After the dam has 
 been raised above the 200-foot level and the water is passing through the temporary 
 spillway, power may be had by constructing a hydroelectric plant at the outlet of 
 this tunnel. 
 
 CONCLUSION-. 
 
 1. At thp site of the Lee Ferry Dam. the canyon is narrow and the red sandstone is 
 of good quality. These conditions favor the construction of a rock-fill dam. It seems 
 probable that practically all of the 50.000.000 cubic yards of rock for the fill can be 
 blasted into place. However, it will be necessary, or at least advisable, to resort to 
 the hand-and-derrick method in placing a part of the rock in the portion of the dam 
 above the 600- foot level. The slopes of the finished dam are not expected to conform 
 exactly with those shown on figure 3, but it is the writer's opinion that the average 
 slope should not be steeper. 
 
 2. (Kdng to the favorable conditions at the site of the dam. the writer believes it 
 entir-r-ly tVa-ible to raise the dam to the 250-foot level with the first discharge of the 
 mines. The quantity of material required to form a dam 250 feet high depends on 
 the depth to the layer of boulders and the depth to bedrock. It would be advisable, 
 therefore, to test the river channel for bedrock by diamond-drill borings. 
 
 3. It would not be necessary to by-pass the flood water until the dam has been 
 raised to an elevation of 200 feet above the bed of the river, except that provision 
 must, be made to meet the demand for water for irrigation.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 179 
 
 4. Provision should be made to control the water level in the reservoir above an 
 elevation of 200 feet in order to facilitate the sluicing of fine material into the rock 
 fill to make it water tight. 
 
 5. Flood water should not be permitted to overtop the dam after it has been built 
 higher than 200 feet above the river bed. 
 
 I. A permanent spillway should be provided at the 600-foot level. 
 
 7. The raw materials necessary for the construction of rock-fill dam are conven- 
 iently situated. 
 
 S. "in this project it is planned to do on a large scale what has often been success- 
 fully accomplished on a smaller scale. The writer believes the most uncertain 
 feat'ure of the project is the work of making the rock fill water-tight. If the seepage 
 through the dam is sufficient to cause erosion it would not be very expensive, con- 
 sidering the magnitude of the project, to blast in the canyon walls and produce a 
 0:1 slope from the crest of the dam to the lower toe. 
 
 9. The writer believes that a rock-fill dam properly constructed would be fully as 
 safe as a concrete dam. To the design herein presented for a rock-fill dam. the unit 
 stresses developed in the foundation and abutment walls are low and need be given 
 minor consideration. This type of dam. however, may be subject to failure due to 
 a blowout which might be caused by the upward hydrostatic pressure of the water 
 percolating under the foundation. The writer believes that the rock-fill dam de- 
 scribed in this paper would be safe against blowouts or erosion. Should erosion 
 occur, no doubt the trouble could be remedied long before there was any real danger 
 of the dam failing. 
 
 Should either the rock-fill or a concrete dam be overtopped by a flood, the damage 
 mi^ht be sufficient to cause failure. A flood passing over the top of the rock-fill dam 
 would cause at least a partial failure of the dam. The seriousness of the damage 
 would depend on the magnitude and duration of the flood. 
 
 Because the capacity of the reservoir is enormous, it is a comparatively simple 
 matter to provide adequate spillway capacity, and the chances of a dam being over- 
 topped by a flood are remote. 
 
 10. A concrete dam built at the Lee Ferry site to raise the water 700 feet above 
 the bed of the river would have a volume of about 5.400,000 cubic yards and would 
 probably cost, including spillway structures, about fSO.OCO.OCO. It is difficult to 
 estimate the cost of a dam of the rock-fill type, but a liberal estimate indicates that 
 it would be little more than half that of the concrete dam. 
 
 XE\V YOKK, July 1, IB 
 Hon. CARL HAYDEN, 
 
 House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. 
 
 MY DEAR SIR: Inaccordance with my letter of the 23d ult., lam inclosing herewith 
 a proof of the discussion by Arthur P. Davis, past president American Society of Civil 
 Engineers, on the paper by E. C. LaRue, entitled "Tentative plan for the construction 
 of a 780-foot rock-fill dam on the Colorado River at Lee Ferry, Ariz., " for the use of the 
 Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands. 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 ELBERT M. CHANDLER, 
 Acting Secretary American Society of Civil Engineers. 
 
 TENTATIVE PLAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 780-FooT ROCK-FILL DAM ON THE 
 
 COLORADO RIVER. 
 
 [By Arthur P. Davis, Director United States Reclamation Service, Washington, D. C., past president 
 American Society of Civil Engineering.] 
 
 The first proposition known to the writer for constructing a high dam in a large 
 stream on an alluvial bottom by dumping loose rock into the flowing water without 
 diverting the river or excavating; the foundation was made by the late A. (i. Menocal, 
 member American Society of Civil Engineering, chief engineer of the Maritime Canal 
 Co., who proposed such an operation for a dam about 65 feet in heighth on the San 
 Juan River a few miles below the mouth of the San Carlos at a point called Ochoa, 
 where the river forms the boundary line between Costa Rica and Nicaragua. The 
 following extract from a paper prepared by Mr. Menocal for the water commerce 
 congress at Chicago in 1893 describes the dam and method of construction: 
 
 It consists in dumping from an aerial suspension conveyor large and small material 
 properly assorted, across the river from bank to bank until a barrier is created suffi- 
 ciently high and strong to arrest the flow and hold the waters at the required level, 
 the body of the dam to be made up of large blocks of stone, weighing from 1 to 10 tons, 
 and smaller material to fill the voids. Its base will be quite broad as compared with
 
 180 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 the height, probably from 400 to 500 feet between the foot of the up-stream slope and 
 the end of the apron. The top is estimated 30 feet wide, the rock up-stream slope 1 
 to 1 , and the apron, or downstream slope , 4 to 1 , with the lower portion flattening down 
 to 5 or 6 to 1. On the upstream side small material, such as stone, fragments of gravel, 
 clay, etc., selected as circumstances may require, will be deposited as the work ad- 
 vances, in sufficient quantity, as tight as wanted. It is not expected or even desirable 
 to have a water-tight structure, the object sought being simply to oppose such an 
 obstruction to the river as may be necessary to hold the waters at the required level. 
 The minimum flow of the river is about ten times the water needed for working the 
 canal. Consequently, nine-tenths of it can l>c wasted with advantage. That the 
 dam will eventaully become tight there can be no doubt, as the small drifts and detritus 
 forced in by the current will gradually fill the voids and consolidate the structure. 
 
 "The method of construction will be quite simple. After protecting the abut- 
 ments against possible erosion, large pieces of rock will be dumped in the bed of the 
 stream from three or four cableways spanning the valley. The material should be 
 distributed uniformly over the area under the main portion of the dam, commencing 
 upstream and keeping up, as nearly as possible, an even level. Scouring will soon 
 cause settling of the blokes into firmer soil, the upper level in the meantime being 
 constantly raised by depositing more stone, while the small material is being forced 
 by the current into the voids, and the overflow dislodging and rearranging the unstable 
 blocks until they reach a final resting place. This process to be continued until the 
 resistance at the bottom becomes so great as to check scouring due to maximum 
 pressure, when the dam will be carried up to the desired level. The river, in the mean- 
 time running over the mound, will readjust the material in and adapt the apron to 
 the necessary conditions of stability to withstand the effect of the fall, and carry off 
 the water safely. If the dam is then raised so as to shut off a whole or the largest part 
 of the river flow, which can by that time be discharged over the waste weirs, the struc- 
 ture will be permanent." (H. Doc. 279, 54th Cong., first sess., p. 53.) 
 
 It was proposed that this dam be an overflow weir, and this feature has been gen- 
 erally condemned. 
 
 The Nicaragua Canal Board, consisting of the late Col. William Ludlow, member 
 American Society of Civil Engineering, Admiral Mordecai T. Endicott, and the late 
 Alfred Noble, past presidents American Society of Civil Engineering, studied the 
 plans of the company and made the following comments on this design : 
 
 "It appears from this account of typical existing dams that, although rock-fill 
 dams are not new, and although weirs have been built on sand and maintained suc- 
 cessfully, the Ochoa Dam is actually without precedent in its more serious aspects, 
 and its construction will be far more difficult than any that have been mentioned. 
 The successful rock-fill dams have impervious foundations and are made water-tight 
 by sheathing or masonry. 
 
 " The materials in them are in great part hand laid, adding greatly to their stability, 
 and none of them has been built in conflict with the forces of a great river or was in- 
 tended to be used as a weir for the discharge of floods. 
 
 "As to this last point, the board is clear in its judgment that no such endeavor 
 should be made in the case of the Ochoa Dam, as involving an unwarrantable hazard 
 to the safety of the structure and of the canal navigation. 
 
 * * * * * * * 
 
 "The weakest point of a dam built as the company proposes would probably be at 
 the river bank, where the loose rock will meet the steep clay slope. The method 
 proposed for protecting this point by lines of sheet piling and concrete core seems 
 entirely inadequate. A better construction would involve the use of a caisson on 
 each side of the river, located so as to be partly in the river channel and partly in the 
 firm clay bank, and sunk by the pneumatic process to bedrock if within reach by that 
 means, or if not at least below reach of scour. It seems probable that either bedrock 
 or a mass of bowlders would be found near sea level, elevation O. The caisson should 
 be surmounted by a concrete wall, extending up the hillside beyond the caisson to 
 the highest elevation to be reached by the water surface after the completion of the 
 dam. say 114 or 11(5. A trench 20 feet or so in depth, or deeper if necessary to reach 
 firm material, should be excavated in the hillside for the core wall. This work done, 
 the river banks and hillsides below high-water level should be covered with a heavy 
 mass of large stones and an additional amount held in reserve before depositing any 
 rock in the river. The result of this would be to contract somewhat the width of the 
 river channel, which would at once scour out so as to maintain its normal cross section. 
 A considerable scour would be desirable, because it is important that the rock mass be 
 sunk deeply into the river bed. since, if rock or a bed of bowlders or heavy gravel 
 can be reached, the safety of the structure will be increased greatly. In depositing 
 rock in the river those methods should be used which will indxice scour, and possibly 
 the building out from each side may best answer this purpose.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIN. 181 
 
 "The rock mound would be quite permeable, and the water pressure against it 
 would vary with the volume of the discharge. To make it hold water, an embank- 
 ment, which would form the real dam, the rock mound serving as its support, must be 
 built on the upstream side. It is proposed to make the embankment of fine stone, 
 gravel, clay. etc.. with the view that a quantity of these materials should be carried 
 well into the rock mound. An embankment composed largely of clay dumped in the 
 wat'T would take a much flatter slope than 3 : 1. For these reasons the quantity 
 estimated by the company would have to be increased largely, and means may have 
 to be adopted, not contemplated by the company, to render the dam tight enough to 
 answer its purpose, as the permissible leakage is much less than the company has 
 assumed. 
 
 " I>v the addition of the embankment, and the retardation by friction of the flow 
 of water through the underlying sand bed, the dam will be rendered more secure 
 from undercutting and consequent settlement; but some doubt as to ultimate security 
 will still remain. Confdenee would be gained to a certain extent during the con- 
 struction of the dam if no breaches were caused by the annual floods, but it would 
 require a considerable period of time after the completion of the dam to allay all 
 apprehension. If a site can be found where the dam can be built above a rock or 
 other stable foundation, the permanence of the structure will be rendered much 
 more probable and the uncertainties of construction reduced. 
 
 "l< such a dam becomes breached with the great volume of water standing at a 
 high level against it. destruction would follow quickly. The crest, therefore, should 
 be raised so far above the surface of the water in the pool that a considerable settle- 
 ment could be sustained without sinking the crest below the water surface." (H. 
 Doc. 279. 54th Cong.. 1st sess., pp. 61-64.) 
 
 It should be noted that the board places emphasis on the importance of scour in 
 settling the foundation as far into the sand as possible. It is also to be noted that 
 this eminent board of engineers was doubtful of the permanent safety of a dam even 
 of this height under these conditions. 
 
 The practical application of the method of damming a large river by dumping 
 rock on a bed of silt while the river flowed over it was made by the SoutKern Pacific 
 Co. in 1906, in the spectacular control of the Colorado River when it was flowing into 
 Salton Basin. The same method was used in constructing a cofferdam across the 
 Colorado River in making the final closure for the Laguna Dam. In neither case, 
 however, was the water allowed to flow permanently over the rock-fill as proposed 
 by Mr. Menocal, and the rock used was settled deep into the silt by the erosion of 
 the water during construction. 
 
 The author proposes no means for effecting a water-tight junction between the 
 rock-fill and its abutments, and the writer sees no effective method of accomplishing 
 such a junction between the proposed silt filling and the rock. Under such a head, 
 water would follow the rock with a velocity likely to become erosive at many points, 
 and thus open avenues of danger. The best solution seems to be a concrete pavement 
 cemented to the abutments with all the care and precaution that the highest skill 
 can suggest. Cracks which might appear should be sealed with a cement gun on 
 the first opportunity. 
 
 In considering the construction of a loose-rock dam in Boulder Canyon during the 
 past fe - v years the ( iovernment engineers and those whom they have consulted have 
 regarded the settlement of the loose rock into the soft material as deeply as possible 
 as one of the most important and difficult operations to accomplish, and it seems 
 obvious that it can not be made perfect without excavating the loose material, but 
 might perhaps v ith many precautions be made of sufficient extent to secure safety. 
 
 The author's proposal to deposit enough rock in the river at one blast to bring the 
 dam to the 250-foot level seems especially designed to prevent any water action in 
 the direction of scour and of sinking the rock into the silt. lie says: 
 
 "If the canyon walls were blasted into the river, the heavy mass of material would 
 settle to the level of the bowlders, assumed to be 60 feet below the bed of the river, 
 and some of the fine sand and silt would be forced up." 
 
 No reason is given for this important conclusion, and the methods proposed seem 
 likely to prevent this desirable result. 
 
 If this dam were built by the methods suggested by the author, there would be a 
 considerable part of the structure below the river bed founded upon sanxl and silt. 
 As the water rose in the reservoir after the dam was completed, the head on this .-ilt. 
 would gradually increase, and no assurance could be given that a critical point might 
 not be reached when the reservoir is nearly full, and sufficient percolation through 
 the foundation might take place to start erosion and cut a channel through the sill. 
 A free channel ever so small resulting from the slight arching of the rock, which would 
 conduct water through the sand at a velocity due to more than 700 feet of head, would 
 scour rapidly, carrying considerable rock until a channel was excavated large enough
 
 182 
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 to allow the rock above to settle, and unless this was accomplished in one motion the 
 scour would continue until the main rock-fill fell into place. If it was arched suffi- 
 ciently, it would not do so promptly, and the scour would continue until the opening 
 would carry a flood much larger than normal and do great damage below. It seems 
 inevitable, however, that eventually the rock fill would fall in place and stop this. 
 If in so doing it should fall below the level of the water in the reservoir, the dam 
 would be overtopped. No loose rock dam has ever been overtopped without failing, 
 and some have failed. None of them has had a 780-foot head nor 50.000.000 acre-feet 
 of stored water behind it to complete its destruction. 
 
 It should be remembered that the proposed reservoir of 50.000.000 acre-feet has an 
 area of 235,000 acres and a discharge of 1,000,000 acre'feet would lower the reservoir 
 only about 6 feet. This would afford an average flow of 500.000 second feet for 24 
 hours. No one can do'ibt that this would destroy the dam faster than it would lower 
 the reservoir. The writer will not attempt to describe the results of suddenly releas- 
 ing 50.000,000 acre-feet of water. It would at least submerge and destroy the great 
 Imperial Valley and all improvements along the lower Colorado River, and doubtless 
 many lives would be lost. 
 
 It is readily seen that the danger of failure and the magnitude of the disaster aro 
 both greatly augmented with the height of the dam. This law applies especially to 
 an unprecedented or doubtful design. 
 
 Where the necessary structure so far exceeds precedent, to build it any higher than 
 needed would be inexcusable. The author appears to consider a capacity of 20,000,000 
 acre-feet sufficient to regulate the river. The writer agrees with this estimate, l;ui 
 would provide 20 per cent more to store silt and prolong the usefulness of the reservoir. 
 There can therefore be no reason for building a reservoir of greater capacity than 
 about 24,000,000 acre-feet, except for the increased head for power development. 
 This site is so remote from markets and so much farther than many other available 
 sites that there is at present no excuse, and for many years or decades there will be 
 no justification, for developing power at this point. The available head can be 
 utili'/ed by building dams of moderate dimensions at other points without such 
 unprecedented and hazardous characteristics. 
 
 The author states (p. 845) that the construction of a dam near Lee's ferry would 
 remove the menace from floods on the lower river, except floods from the Gila River. 
 That statement is erroneous, as the proposed dam would leave about 50,000 square 
 miles of drainage are unregulated, besides that of the Gila. It is perfectly proper, as 
 the author does, to except the Gila River, which for brief periods sometimes furnishes 
 floods as great as those of the Colorado: but the area of 50,000 square miles between 
 the mouth of the Gila and Lee's ferry should also be excepted. Most of this area can 
 be intercepted by a dam at Boulder Canyon, which is the lowest point in the basin 
 where this can be done, and is accordingly the proper place for storage purposes if 
 the floods are to be controlled. 
 
 The author's table on page 836 sn'ows a capacity for Lee Ferry Dam of 50,000,000 
 acre-feet and Boulder Canyon Dam of 31,680,000 acre-feet. The results of the actual 
 surveys were probably not available to the author when he submitted his paper. 
 These surveys have been in progress for a long time and the results are now available 
 and are shown roughly in Table I, giving comparative area and capacity for each 
 given height of the dam as high as the surveys have been carried at Boulder Canyon: 
 
 Table I. 
 
 Height of dam above river bed in feet. 
 
 Boulder Canyon 
 Reservoir. 
 
 Glenn Canyon 
 Reservoir. 
 
 Area in 
 acres. 
 
 Capacity 
 in acre- 
 feet. 
 
 Area in 
 acres. 
 
 Capacity 
 in acre- 
 feet. 
 
 50... 
 
 3.500 
 7,500 
 15,500 
 25,000 
 33,500 
 44,000 
 57,000 
 73,000 
 90,000 
 109,000 
 132,000 
 157,000 
 
 88,000 
 362,000 
 937,000 
 1,950,000 
 3,413,000 
 5, 350, 000 
 7, S75, 000 
 11,125,000 
 15,200,000 
 20,175,000 
 26,200,000 
 33,425,000 
 
 4,000 
 7,000 
 10,800 
 16,600 
 24,000 
 34,000 
 47,000 
 63,000' 
 85,000 
 114,000 
 145,000 
 178,000 
 
 100,000 
 375.000 
 820,000 
 1,505,000 
 2,520,000 
 3,970.000 
 5,995,000 
 8,745,000 
 12,445,000 
 17, 420, 000 
 23, 895, 000 
 31,970,000 
 
 100... 
 
 150. 
 
 200 
 
 250. 
 
 300 
 
 350. . 
 
 400 
 
 450... 
 
 500 
 
 550 
 
 600 . 

 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN". 183 
 
 Table I shows that for the heights given the Glenn Canyon reservoir would have 
 less rapacity than Boulder Canyon. 
 
 A dam 780 feet in height in Glenn Canyon near Lee's Ferry would introduce not 
 only unnecessary' hazards hut would waste a large quantity of water by evaporation, 
 A reservoir of 24, 000, 000 acre -feet capacity in Glenn Canyon would have an area of 
 about 125, 0'X) acres, according to the available surveys, whereas one of 50,000,000 
 acre-feet capacity would have a surface area of 235,000 acres and unnecessarily expose 
 to evaporation 110,000 acres. This would be at its highest stages during the hot 
 months of June. July. August, and September. Assuming an average excess area of 
 100,000 acres, and an annual evaporation of 6 feet from the extra area, 600,000 acre- 
 feet of water would be wasted annually, all of which would be lost for use at the num- 
 erous high dams eventually to be built in the canyon below. 
 
 The utter absence of anything approaching a precedent to the proposed plans 
 leaves the writer in much the same doubts as those which remained in the minds of 
 the Nicaragua Canal Board previously quoted, and there certainly is sufficient doubt so 
 that it would be inexcusable to attempt such a structure where more conservative 
 designs are possible or to build the dam under these conditions any higher than 
 necessary. 
 
 ( >pinions concerning the safety of the proposed design can hardly be considered of 
 much value until something is known of the underground conditions, which have not. 
 been investigated at Glenn Canyon. Still less is it possible, under these conditions, 
 to make intelligent estimates of cost of any type of dam. These conditions.at Boulder 
 Canyon have been carefully investigated, and comparative estimates of high concrete 
 and rock-fill dams have been made by men with large experience in the construction 
 of high dams. These estimates lead to the conclusion that the rock-fill type, with 
 proper precautions for safety, could not be relied on to be much cheaper than a massive 
 concrete structure the safety of which would be without question. 
 
 POWER DEVELOPMENT ON THE COLORADO RIVER AND ITS RELATION TO IRRIGATION 
 
 AND FLOOD CONTROL. 
 
 [By O. C. Merrill, executive secretary, Federal Power Commission.] 
 
 One of the most important and interesting of our present-day engineering problems 
 is the control and development of the Colorado River. Its interest and importance 
 arise from the fact that it involves the irrigation of millions of acres of land, the pro- 
 duction of millions of water horsepower, and the protection from floods of millions 
 of dollars of property values, and that it affects the general economic interests of seven 
 of our Slates and two of the States of Mexico. It is of interest also in its political 
 relations using this term in its etymological, not its ordinary, sense. Seven sovereign 
 States claim in the use of the waters of the Colorado rights which in the aggregate' 
 mav exceed its possibilities. Its waters can not be put to use without, the sanction 
 of the States in which the use is proposed and without the concurrent sanction of the 
 Federal Government, which owns the lands necessary for such use and which possesses 
 a general control over the river from the fact that it is an international stream. It 
 remains to be seen to what extent political considerations will modify engineering; 
 considerations in the solution of the problem. 
 
 The two main branches of the Colorado rise, the one in southwestern Wyoming,, 
 the other in central Colorado. The length of the river from the headwaters of the 
 Green to the Gulf of California is about 1.750 miles. Its basin, with an area of about 
 250,000 square miles, includes practically all of Arizona, nearly one-half of Colorado 
 and of Utah, one-fifth of Wyoming and of New Mexico, one-tenth of Nevada, and a 
 narrow strip in California along the California-Arizona boundary. 
 
 The Imperial Valley in California, though not topographically a part of the Coloroad 
 Basin, should also be included because of its dependence upon the waters of the river 
 and because of its intimate relation to the general problem of river control. Of the 
 area of the basin some 5.000,000 acres, or about 1 acre in 30, appear economically 
 irrigable. Claims, however, have been made that there is a much larger amount of 
 available irrigable land. The annual run-off of the river at Yuma averages about 
 18,000,000 acre-feet. The average discharge is about 24,000 cubic feet per second, with 
 variations from a minimum of 4,000 second-feet to a maximum of 150,000 second-feet 
 on the main river and to 240.000 second-feet by inclusion of the Gila. The steep slope 
 of the river and its large volume make it capable of producing some 6,000,000 water 
 horsepower, or two-thirds as much as is developed in the United States to-day. 
 
 1316 22 PT 3 8
 
 184 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 A discussion of the general problems of the Colorado will be made clearer if we divide 
 the river into three sections and consider the characteristics of these sections and their 
 relations to each other. 
 
 The upper section from the headwaters to the Utah-Arizona line, just below the 
 mouth of the San Juan, comprises about 40 per cent of the area of the basin and affords 
 about 87 per cent of the total run-off, or an average of about 15,000.000 acre-feet per 
 annum. In this section are some 2, 500, 000- acres of irrigable land, one-half of the 
 estimated total in the basin. It also has power possibilities aggregating 2.000,000 
 horsepower. In this section, both upon the main stream and upon its tributaries, are 
 many favorable reservoir sites by means of which it would be practicable to regulate 
 the flow of streams for irrigation within the section, or for power development both 
 within the section and outside, or. if desirable, for flood control on the lower river. In 
 so far as the tributaries arennvolved. these several uses would conflict to a considerable 
 degree and only a careful study of the whole section could determine the best com- 
 bination of uses. At the lower end of the section is the so-called Glenn Canyon re- 
 servoir site, which has an important bearingon all developments and uses of water below. 
 The middle section from the mouth of the San Juan to the mouth of the Williams 
 comprises about 35 per cent of the area of the basin and supplies about 7 per cent of 
 the annual run-off. There are no irrigable lands along the river in this section and 
 only some 250,000 acres on the tributaries, none of which can be reached from the 
 main river. In this section, however, there is a total drop of about 3,000 feet, capable, 
 if fully utilizing the average annual run-off entering the section, of producing 4,000.000 
 horsepower. Except for the Boulder Canyon site near the lower end of the section, 
 which would have no effect on the greater part of this section, there appear to be no 
 storage sites capable of providing any considerable amount of seasonal storage. Dams 
 erected for power development would be primarily for the purpose of concentrating 
 head and of providing pondage for daily load regulation. Seasonal regulation would 
 be dependent upon storage in the upper section. 
 
 The lower section from the mouth of the Williams River to the Gulf and including 
 the drainage of the Gila and the Imperial and Coachella Valleys in California com- 
 prises some 25 per cent of the total area of the basin and furnishes about 6 per cent of 
 the average annual run-off. Its power possibilities are relatively unimportant, but it 
 contains some 2,250,000 acres of irrigable land, the most fertile and most valuable in 
 the basin, a large part of which is periodically endangered by floods. There appear 
 to be no reservoir sites of consequence below Boulder Canyon on the main river, but 
 there are such sites on the Gila which could be used both for irrigation and for con- 
 trolling the Gila floods. 
 
 Mewed solely from the physical standpoint, the upper section of the basin might 
 have its primary development directed either toward irrigation or toward water power; 
 or it might, as it probably will, have a combination of these two uses. On the other 
 hand, the middle section, with the exception of storage below the mouth of the Vir- 
 gin and of relatively small irrigable areas on the tributaries, is suitable only for power 
 development . Eq ually clearly the waters reaching the lower section should be devoted 
 primarily, if not exclusively, to irrigation, and the storage sites should be employed 
 for irrigation or flood control, or both. 
 
 The most immediately pressing problem on the Colorado River is flood control for 
 the protection of the Imperial Valley in California. I shall not attempt, however, 
 to discuss it in detail, but merely to present certain aspects of that problem in the 
 relation they bear to water power and to a general plan of river development. 
 
 The Gulf of California originally extended northwesterly into what is now the State 
 of California. The silt-laden water of the river gradually formed a delta cone extend- 
 ing across the gulf, cutting off the northern end and deflecting the flow of the river to 
 the south. The water inclosed in the northern end evaporated, leaving the depres- 
 sion known as the Imperial Valley and the Salton Sea, with its surface 250 feet below 
 sea level. The silt-formed delta is unstable. The river is constantly depositing 
 more sediment and shifting its channel back and forth over the flat ridge some 30 
 feet above sea level which forms the crest of the delta, and there is danger at each 
 flood season that it may break northward into the Imperial Valley instead of continu- 
 ing southward into the gulf. The river did break through in 1905 and for more than 
 a year and a half discharged into Salton Sea before it was turned back with great 
 difficulty and expense into its old channel. The levees which were later built to 
 protect the valley have several times been awash in periods of floods. It is necessary 
 to raise them about a foot a year to keep pace with the rise of the river channel, and 
 it is only a matter of time when the river will break through again unless steps are 
 taken to control the floods. The situation is further complicated by the fact that the 
 works for protecting the Imperial Valley are situated in Mexico. It is this condition 
 of affairs which has placed primary emphasis on flood control in all plans for the devel- 
 opment of the Colorado River.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 185 
 
 Flood conditions on the lower Colorado may be caused either by high water on the 
 main river or high water on the Gila. Flood eonditoins on the main river occur 
 annually in the summer season, are due to the melting of snows on the headwaters of 
 the streams, and continue on the average from two to three months. The maximum 
 flood from the main river in the years of record, 1902 to 1914, inclusive, has been 
 150,000 second-feet. The average mean monthly discharge during the three high 
 months of >fay, June, and July for this same period of record has been: May, 42,600; 
 June, 73,100: and July, 43, 500* second-feet. While the floods from the Gila approach 
 in magnitude those of the main river, they occur in the winter season, are caused 
 by. local rains, and are of short duration. Should it happen, however, by any com- 
 bination of circumstances that extreme flood conditions on the Gila should coincide 
 with similar conditions on the main river, a break through into the Imperial Valley 
 would be almost inevitable. 
 
 On account of the volume of water involved, it is apparent that protection from 
 Colorado River floods can be had only by storage and by storage of large capacity. It, 
 is also apparent that full immunity from flood damages can be had only by storage on 
 the Gila as well as storage on the. Colorado. Since, however, storage on the Gila has 
 only an indirect relation to the general problem of the Colorado River, it will be given 
 no further consideration here. 
 
 There appear to be three practicable locations for flood control reservoirs of the 
 capacity necessary. These are on the headwater tributaries, on the main river at 
 Glen Canyon, and on the main river at Boulder Canyon. Storage on the headwaters 
 would require several reservoirs, and even though practicable from a purely flood- 
 control standpoint, such a plan involves at least two serious objections. The opera- 
 tion of such reservoirs to meet the needs of the lower river would be likely to interfere 
 to a considerable degree with the use of the waters for irrigation in the upper section 
 and to a lesser degree for power development, depending upon their location and their 
 manner of operation. If duplication of investment is to be avoided, flood-control 
 reservoirs must also provide irrigation storage for the lower river. To operate for this 
 purpose reservoirs located hundreds of miles above the lands to be irrigate d would be 
 an extremely difficult problem and would inevitably result in wastage of water and 
 consequently in a storage capacity greater than would otherwise be necessary. 
 
 Adequate storage for both flood control and irrigation could apparently be had at the 
 Glen Canyon site at the Utah-Arizona line. From an irrigation standpoint this site 
 presents similar objections, though less in degree, to sites on the headwaters, since 
 the reservoir would still be a considerable distance from the lands to be irrigated. 
 From a flood-control standpoint, however, it appears adequate. It would intercept 
 87 per cent of the run-off of the basin, and would include every tributary of conse- 
 quence above the Gila, except the Little Colorado. This stream is subject only to 
 flash floods and enters the main river so far above the Imperial Valley that its floods 
 can not be considered as dangerous. Storage at this point is of sufficient capacity 
 to provide for power development and irrigation as well as for flood control, and 
 hence would not interfere with, but be a distinct aid to, power development in the 
 middle section. 
 
 The proposed Boulder Canyon site has certain distinct advantages over all other 
 sites if considered wholly from the standpoint of the flood control and irrigation re- 
 quirements of the Imperial Valley. It is comparatively near to the irrigable lands, 
 and operation difficulties would be reduced to a minimum. It will intercept all floods 
 on the river, except those from the Gila. It would even be possible to ameliorate 
 flood conditions from the Gila by stopping all discharge from the main river while the 
 Gila is in flood. If nothing but the flood control and irrigation requirements of the 
 Imperial Valley were 1 to be considered, ihere would appear to be no doubt of the su- 
 perior advantages of the Boulder Canyon site. When, however, consideration is given 
 to the problem of development of the river as a whole, the situation is by no means so 
 clear. 
 
 Both the Glen Canyon and the Boulder Canyon sites are likely eventually to be 
 built, and both present engineering problems of magnitude. To provide the proposed 
 minimum storage capacity of 21,000,000 acre-feet at Boulder Canyon and an equal 
 amount at Glen Canyon will require dams of unprecedented height. Preliminary plans 
 propose a masonry dam at Boulder Canyon some 530 feet in height above the river chan- 
 nel. When it is realized that the river channel has a depth of l:)"> I'eet below \\aier 
 level, that the river flows through a narrow canyon, and that floods in excess of 100,000 
 second-feet are likely to be encountered during construction, the magnitude of the 
 engineering problems to be met will be appreciated. 
 
 Detailed investigation, particularly borings, have not yet been made of the Glen 
 Canyon site, and the type of dam has therefore not been determined. If foundation 
 conditions are not more unfavorable, this site should from the construction standpoint
 
 186 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BA.-IX. 
 
 have certain distinct advantages over the Boulder Canyon site. The river forms a 
 double loop at the dam site, one-half of which is 28,000 feet around, but at its nan 
 parts only 3,000 feet across at water level, and only 2.000 feet at 500 feet above water 
 level. This condition provides better opportunity for handling water during con- 
 struction than at Boulder Canyon and also affords better opportunity for ' obstructing 
 outlet works and spillway independent of the darn carrying by the one through and 
 the other over the narrow section whkh separates the two sides of the loop. 
 
 When we consider the relation of irrigation to power development u~e find that 
 only about one acre in thirty in the Colorado basin i.s irrisrable. but that it has ]> <>r 
 resources more than sufficient to meet its needs for generations. v ii l ce it is likely to 
 require all the agricultural products that its lands can supply long before it has put 
 to use all its potential water powers, it would appear the part of wisdom to dedicate 
 the waters of its streams to irrigation to the extent they can be efficiently used for 
 such purpose, leaving water-pov <-r di'\elopment to take the second phve. If reason- 
 ably conservative practices are followed and all unnecessary . i<'d. there 
 appears to be ample water in the Colorado and its tributaries to irrigate all lands 
 v ithin economic reach of the streams. The problem of water supply for such pur- 
 ! is, therefore, one of e >uitab!e distribution: and this is the problem which the 
 Colorado River Commission has been created io solve. I shall not discuss it further 
 than to say that, if irrigation be assumed as the dominant UPC. tlu-'v v. uiiM still be 
 opportunity to develop hundreds of thousands of horsepower in the upper basin ui:di r 
 properly developed plans and that, from the water which would be reli-;i-"<J from the 
 upper section for the irrigation requirements of the 1" mild still 
 be available millions of horsepo ' er in the middle section. 
 
 Since there v- ill be no irrigation development in the middle section of the river 
 other than the probability of the provision of irrigation storage at the lov er end of 
 the section, and since no water v ill be withdrawn from the river in ; - :i for 
 such purpose, there w ill be no coil: ict bet ' een irrigation and po > er. In the upper 
 section, hov ever, such conflict is certain to exist. >ot only v ill water be permanently 
 withdrawn from the river, but storage reservoirs can not be fully used for both pur- 
 poses. For this reason, a? well as on account of the greater volume of v ater and the 
 greater fall, the middle section is the most favorable for po'^er development. But 
 power development on the Colorado, as well a.s irrigation and Hood control, requires 
 seasonal storage. This is necessary not only to produce a regulated lio v. but, in the 
 canyon section at least, as a protection airainst floods, for the narrowness of the river 
 channel and the consequent restricted spilhvav length is likely to produce depths of 
 discharge in flood season that might seriously restrict the height of dams that it 
 would be safe to construct. 
 
 Sufficient capacity for seasonal regulation can not on account of topographic condi- 
 tions be secured in the middle section except at Boulder Canyon, and that of course 
 is available only for use at that site or below. For the greater part of the section 
 storage must be either at the head of the section or in the upper river. If it shall prove 
 feasible of construction. Glen Canyon reservoir is peculiarly well adapted for the pur- 
 pose. It is situated at the crest of the steep canyon slope, and appears to have a 
 capacity sufficient to equalize the flow of the river over a series of years. 
 
 The fact that this reservoir must eventually be built in connection with power 
 developments below and that when built it is likely of itself to solve the flood prob- 
 lem of the main river has naturally raised the question, why build both Glen Canyon 
 and Boulder Canyon, or, if both, w-hy build the latter first? The construction of Glen 
 Canyon reservoir by eliminating flood conditions would make the construction of all 
 dams in the river below far easier, cheaper, and safer. Nothing which may be done 
 at Boulder Canyon will obviate in any degree the eventual necessity for Glen Canyon 
 reservoir or reduce the difficulties of other construction in the canyon above. On 
 the other hand, if Glen Canyon is built, the greater part of Boulder Canyon storage 
 as storage would become useless. It would seem, therefore, that the prior construc- 
 tion of this dam could be justified only on one or both of two grounds: Either that the 
 imminence of the peril to the Imperial Valley justifies the cost of the Boulder Canyon 
 Dam even if only temporarily required for flood control purposes; or that the cost is 
 justified, independently of storage, by the additional power that could thus be pro- 
 duced by a dam of the height proposed. In any event, some storage below the Virgin 
 is desirable, if not necessary, even if Glen Canyon reservoir is constructed, in order 
 to regulate the water at that point to meet immediate irrigation requirements farther 
 down the river. Which reservoir should be built first and whether the full capacity 
 of both is needed are questions about which there is considerable difference of opinion. 
 I shall only say that there appears to be enough doubt to warrant a thorough study 
 of the upper site before commitment is made to Boulder Canyon, and that in such 
 study due consideration should be given to power developments in the middle section
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BA.S1X. 187 
 
 as well as to irrigation and flood control on the lower section. I have placed emphasis 
 upon this question of the location of primary storage, whether at the head or at the 
 foot of the middle section, because it is a factor of great importance in the problems 
 of power development and may determine the entire course of such development 
 upon the river. 
 
 The extent of the interest in the power possibilities of the Colorado River may be 
 judged from the fact that there are on file with the Federal Power Commission 20 
 applications affecting the Colorado River and its tributaries aggregating four and one- 
 half million primary horsepower and (i. 000, 000 horsepower of estimated installation. 
 It is, however, quite apparent that no such amount of power will be developed in the 
 near future simply because it could not be disposed of. The rate of power develop- 
 ment on the Colorado is a question of markets. The sites at the headwaters will 
 gradually be developed to supplement the existing Utah and Colorado power systems. 
 When we turn to the middle or canyon section, however, we find that local demands 
 for power in this part of the Colorado Basin are hardly sufficient to justify at the 
 present time any large-scale development. The mining market of central Arizona 
 probably would justify an initial development of some 100,000 horsepower, but to 
 justify large-scale development utilizing any such storage as proposed at either Boulder 
 Canyon or Glenn Canyon would require that primary markets be sought outside 
 the basin, a situation involving long-distance high-tension transmission. 
 
 The only section which at present seems capable of furnishing the requisite demand, 
 and the section which gives greatest promise of increasing its demand in the near 
 future, is the southern half of the State of California. Notwithstanding the great 
 power resources of that State, objection is already being raised against the diversion 
 southward of the electric energy generated from the waters of the central and northern 
 sections of the State. With the continued depletion of its oil reserves and with 
 increasing industrial and agricultural development, the time appears not far distant 
 when California, sould it maintain its present growth of power demand, would be 
 required to go outside its boundaries for new sources of power, even if economic 
 considerations did not lead it to do so at a much earlier date. 
 
 The development of power in the basin of the Colorado for use outside will, however, 
 be an advantage, not a disadvantage, to the people and the industries within the 
 basin. The potential power available is more than the basin itself is ever likely to 
 require. If power is developed on such a scale and at such a cost that it can be 
 economically delivered in large quantities, hundreds of miles from the point of genera- 
 tion, it. can be economically delivered near at hand in smaller quantities, and this 
 fact, if the power is developed under proper auspices, would result in the extension 
 of facilities to existing local markets and in the development of new ones; for the 
 most complete disposition of its products is the ultimate object of power develop- 
 ment. The mining areas within the basin, the railroads which traverse it. the towns 
 within it and along its margin, all would be sought out as users of power once develop- 
 ment were made and the main t-ansmission system established. Distribution of 
 power throughout a sparsely settled area is, however, likely to be attempted only 
 through extensions from a transmission network constructed primarily to serve other 
 and more extensive markets elsewhere. The States within the Colorado Basin would 
 never have secured the railroad sendee they now possess had they not been on the 
 main routes between the Mississippi Valley and the Pacific Coast. They will be in 
 a similarly favorable position with respect to electric power service when trunk trans- 
 mission lines are constructed across their territories. 
 
 The final factor which determines whether power sites can be utilized, the degree 
 to which they may be developed, and the distance to which the power may lie trans- 
 mitted is, of course, the unit cost of energy delivered. To a considerable degree unit 
 costs are less as quantities increase. Particularly on a stream like the Colorado, 
 where, irrespective of the sixe of the project, large preliminary expenses will be 
 involved and long and expensive transmission lines will be required, large-scale 
 development is likely to prove much cheaper in construction costs per unit of avail- 
 able output than small-scale development. The extent, therefore, to which the 
 water powers of the Colorado are to be developed and the degree to which they will 
 be made to serve the interests of the Colorado Basin itself are likely to depend largely, 
 if not primarily, upon whether the power is developed in isolated independent units 
 or in a system of interconnected plants with a trsnamission network extending '>ver 
 the entire territory. If development proceeds by independent units, a few re.-uicted 
 areas will get the benefit of such part of the resources as are developed. If the other 
 plan is followed the entire basin and all the adjacent territory may share in t he 1 .ene. (its. 
 Such a plan, however, can be carried out only by agencies whose authority is not 
 circumscribed by State lines agencies in whose own interest it will be to extemi as 
 widely as possible the territory which they serve. Such a plan does not necessarily
 
 188 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 imply either a single ownership, and it does not imply Government ownership; but 
 it does imply such an interrelationship, at least, as will insure the operation in one 
 interconnected system of the power developments on the Colorado River. 
 
 We come now to a brief consideration of what we have called the political rela 
 tions of the problem. Under the provisions of the Federal water power act. appli 
 cants for license must present evidence of having secured from the State rights nec- 
 essary for the diversion and use of water. It is the general rule of law within the 
 Colorado Basin that he who first puts the waters of a stream to use has a first right 
 in their use. On this doctrine of priority of appropriation . extensive rights to the 
 use of the waters of the Colorado have been acquired on the lower river, for it is that, 
 section of the river which is being the most rapidly developed. The fear has con- 
 sequently arisen in the States in the upper section that, before the time when thev 
 can put what they believe is their share of the water to use. rights to such share will 
 have been acquired on the lower river, particularly if power developments utilizing 
 the full flow of the stream should be authorized on the middle or lower river. Because 
 of this fear and in the hope that the matter might be settled without the endless 
 interstate litigation that would otherwise be almost inevitable, a proposal was made 
 that the several States affected enter into a treaty or compact by which they should 
 mutually agree on the apportionment among themselves of the waters of the river. 
 Under the provisions of the Constitution, such a compact or agreement between 
 States requires the assent of Congress. This assent was given by act of Congress of 
 August 19, 1921, which authorized the creation of a commission to be composed of 
 one representative from each of the seven interested States, who, together with a 
 member appointed by the President, should form a compact ccmmissicn, and should 
 report their conclusions to Congress on or before January 1. 1923. This ccmmisi-ii n 
 has been appointed with Secretary Hoover as the representative of the United States 
 and chairman, has held several sessions, but has thus far come to no agreement. 
 Under the terms of the act creating the comrnissicn. its authority is limited to the 
 determination of an "equitable division and apportionment " of the waters of the 
 river among the States. It has no authority to grant rights itself, and its powers 
 do not conflict with those of the Federal Power Commission or other Federal or State 
 agencies. Since, however, its conclusions might affect or be affected by the approval 
 of applications by the Federal Power Commission, action upon such applications 
 has been suspended awaiting the conclusions of the Colorado River Commission. 
 
 There are also international relations involved. The Colorado RiA'er forms the 
 boundary between the southwestern tip of Arizona and the Mexican State of Lower 
 California. Below the Arizona line it separates Lower ( 'alifornia from Sonora. Some 
 100.000 acres of land in Mexico are now being irrigated from the river, and it is esti- 
 mated that fiSO.OOO additional acres are irrigable, a total of 820.000 acres or 40 per cent, 
 of the irrigable area tributary to the river below Boulder Canyon. Under such cir- 
 cumstances it is manifest that international comity, if no other reason, requires that 
 this situation be taken fully into consideration in any plans of Colorado River devel- 
 opment. In its preliminary report on the problems of Imperial Valley and vicinity 
 of January, 1921, the Reclamation Sendee recommended equitable participation by 
 the Mexican Government in the cost of storage works, and arrangements with that 
 Government for the construction and maintenance of flood protection works on Mexi- 
 can soil. Such participation and arrangements could, of course, be brought about 
 only by the concurrent action of the two Governments. 
 
 There is also the question of the degree to which the United States should itself 
 take part in power or other developments along the river. It is argued, and with 
 apparent, justification, that the cost of flood and irrigation storage is greater than the 
 irrigation interests alone can bear and that, therefore, the Government should itself 
 construct the works and recoup itself by sale of power, some (iOO.OOO horsepower of 
 which could be developed at Boulder Canyon. Whether this arrangement would or 
 would not effect an equitable distribution of benefits among irrigators and power con- 
 sumers. I am not prepared to say. 
 
 There are. furthermore, those who advocate development at Government expense 
 of all the powers along the Colorado River, the distribution of such power by the Gov- 
 ernment at cost, and the prohibition of any development by private capital on the 
 river. This is, of course, merely an instance of the age-long contest between advo- 
 cates of public and of private ownership and operation. On account, however, of 
 the probability that it may be found necessary that the Government participate in 
 the development of the river at least to the extent of furnishing flood protection, 
 general action is unlikely to be taken upon the applications before the Federal Power 
 Commission until conclusions have been reached upon the extent, if any, to which 
 the Government should thus participate.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 189 
 
 Finally, agreement among the several interested agencies should be reached on the 
 general procedure and the general plan of development to be followed on the river, 
 in order that whatever work is done or projects constructed may n't into a scheme for 
 the fullest practicable utilization of the river for all uses to which its waters are adapted . 
 There is an apparent existing need for additional power in certain sections within the 
 lia.-in. The several interested agencies should, therefore, reach their conclusions at 
 the earliest practicable date so that the present order of suspension may be lifted. 
 
 The primary elements of a general plan for river development appears to be as fol- 
 lows: (!) storage at the headwaters for irrigation in the upper section and for such 
 power developernent in this section as can be accomplished without undue interfer- 
 ence with irrigation; (2) storage below the San Juan of sufficient capacity to control 
 floods and to regulate the* water available at that point for power use in the middle 
 section; and (3) storage below the Virgin sufficient, at least, for re-regulation to meet irri- 
 gation requirements of the lower river and for such additional flood protection as may 
 be necessary or desirable. If this or some similar plans can be agreed upon, and an 
 equitable apportionment of the waters effected, the details of the immediate applica- 
 tion of the waters of the river to their respective uses in the individual sections will be 
 greatly simplified, and work may be started on the series of developments upon which 
 the economic progress of the whole Southwest primarily depends. 
 
 : Whereupon, at 11.25 o'clock a. m., the committee adjourned until 10.30 o'clock 
 a. m., Wednesday, June 28, 1922.)
 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF 
 LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 COMMITTEE ON 
 IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS 
 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS 
 SECOND SESSION 
 
 ON 
 
 H. R. 11449 
 
 . By Mr. SWING 
 
 A BILL ,TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT 
 OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN 
 
 PART 4 
 
 JUNE 28, 1922 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 131fi 1922
 
 3V3CI 
 
 5! OQAflC 
 
 Vfi 
 
 . 
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. 
 SIXTY-SEVENTH CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION. 
 
 MOSES P. KINKAID, Nebraska, Chairman. 
 
 NICHOLAS J.'SINNOTT, Oregon. CARL HAYDEN, Arizona. 
 
 EDWARD C. LITTLE, Kansas. C. B. HUDSPETH, Texas. 
 
 ADDISON T. SMITH, Idaho. JOHN E. RAKER, California. 
 
 JOHN W. SUMMERS, Washington. HOMER L. LYON, North Carolina. 
 
 HENRY E. BARBOUR, California. WILLIAM B. BANKHEAD, Alabama. 
 
 E. O. LEATHERWOOD, Utah. 
 WILLIAM WILLIAMSON, South Dakota. 
 SAMUEL S. ARENTZ, Nevada. 
 MANUEL HERRICK, Oklahoma. 
 
 A. R. HUMPHREY, Clerk. 
 
 II 

 
 PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO 
 
 RIVER BASIN. 
 
 COMMITTEE ox IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS, 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 
 
 Wednesday, June 28, 1922. 
 
 The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Edward C. Little (acting 
 chairman) presiding. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. LAWRENCE C. PHIPPS, A UNITED STATES 
 SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. Mr. Chairman, I wish to file with the committee a copy of a 
 telegram received by Senator Nicholson and myself from the mayor of Denver. 
 Colo., expressing a desire on the part of the citizens of Denver to be heard 
 before any final action was taken on this bill, or before the hearings were 
 closed. 
 
 .Mr. VAII.E. I have filed a similar telegram. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. It is not necessary to read it now, but I will file it with the 
 committee. 
 
 (The telegram referred to is as follows:) 
 
 DENVER. COLO., June 23, 1!>.>2. 
 Hon. LAWRENCE C. PHIPPS, 
 Hon. SAMUEL D. NICHOLSON. 
 
 Washington. D. C.: 
 
 Our attention just called to H. R. 11449 by Congressman Swing and S. 3511 by 
 Senator Johnson and to hearings on same before House committee. The future 
 growth and development of Denver and vicinity, as well as nearly one-half the 
 total area of the State of Colorado, are and will be wholly dependent upon the 
 future use of a part of the waters of the Colorado River which have their rise 
 in this State, and we protest- against any legislation by Congress for the con- 
 struction of enormous works upon the lower reaches of the river which may 
 interfere with the future development of the State of Colorado and the neces- 
 sary future diversions for municipal and irigation supplies by Denver and ad- 
 joining territory. The bills in question do not afford such protection. The 
 consideration of such legislation at this time is a surprise to us in view of the 
 present activity respecting the same subject matter by the interstate compact 
 commission appointed by the President and the governors of the seven Colorado 
 River States, and we protest against further activities by Congress until the 
 future rights of this State and city have been assured by interstate compact. 
 In any legislation on this subject adequate provision should be made for lower 
 development for vise of States in the upper basin as well as the lower basin. 
 Before any report is made on this bill Denver desires time and opportunity 
 to be heard. 
 
 D. C. BAU.F.Y, Mui/ur. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. My attention has been called to the Swing bill, which, as 
 I understand it, is practically a duplicate of a bill introduced in the Senate 
 by Senator Johnson, of California, but I have not had an opportunity to see 
 the hearings that have been so far conducted by your committee. Therefore. 
 I am not aware as to what interests are behind the proponents of this measure, 
 but so far. as rny personal information is concerned and I have made some 
 inquiries I have been unable to learn of any community of citizens in the 
 Imperial Valley or the Coachella Valley of California who are asking for the 
 construction of the Boulder Canyon Dam at this time. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I can briefly tell you who has appeared here. 
 
 191
 
 192 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I can post myself later with regard to thar. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Director Davis, of the United States Reclamation Service, made 
 a statement based upon his printed report on the problems of the Imperial 
 Valley, which, undoubtedly, you have seen. Secretary Hoover, of the Depart- 
 ment of Commerce, appeared before the committee, and discussed the bill. 
 There have also been present representatives of the City of Los Angeles, 
 Pasadena, Riverside, and other cities and towns in Southern California, us well 
 as the President of the Imperial Irrigation District, all of whom advocated the 
 passage of the Swing bill. Mr. Yager, representing the Coachella Valley, is 
 present this morning and desires to be heard. 
 
 I can further advise you that this is the last day on which hearings are to 
 be held on the bill at this time. The committee may again take the bill up for 
 consideration after the proposed recess of the House, sometime in August or 
 September, at which time, as I have advised everyone who has asked me, the 
 committee will undoubtedly be glad to hear at length all persons having views 
 on the bill. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. Mr. Chairman. I do not change my statement at all that 
 upon inquiry I am not aware of any community of citizens in California who 
 are asking .for action at this time on any measure of this character, and I sub- 
 mit that since the various Staves that are interested in the waters of the Colo- 
 rado River have appointed commissioners, who, in conjunction with the Federal 
 representative, Mr. Hoover, acting as chairman of the commission, are consider- 
 ing the matter of the allocation of the waters of the Colorado River, iv would be 
 very strange indeed if the Federal Government should be making an appropria- 
 tion of some $70,000,000 to enable one community or one section of the country 
 that can use the waters of the Colorado River for irrigation purposes to set up 
 a prior claim or right by the use of those wavers while these negotiations are in 
 progress. Of course. I have no idea that any affirmative legislation can be had 
 at this time, nor do I think that any legislation should be had until the possi- 
 bilities of other reservoir sites on the Colorado River are considered in connec- 
 tion with the Boulder Canyon site. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. I might say that the suggestion you have made has already been 
 made to the committee, and the committee, I think, is fully convinced of every 
 proposition you advance. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. Without having had an opportunity to know what has already 
 passed before your committee 
 
 Mr. LITTLE (interposing). I think if you will read over the hearings, you will 
 find that the situation is satisfactory in that regard. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I would like to point out vbis fact, that the committee should 
 give consideration to all those other matters in connection with this bill. 
 
 Mi-. LITTI.K. I am sure that you would be satisfied with what has been done 
 by the committee. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. The principal object of this bill, or that would be. at least, 
 inferred from a reading of it, is the control of flood waters, with the incidental 
 use of them for irrigation purposes and for the development of hydroelectric 
 power. Now. the great damage which occurred in the Imperial Valley by rea- 
 son of the flood some years ago when the Southern Pacific Railroad saved the 
 situation, and for which. I believe, it has never been reimbursed by the Federal 
 (Government, was caused, according to my information, by an unusual flood in 
 the Gila River, which comes into the Colorado River below the Boulder Canyon 
 Dam Site. The high flow of this present season which has just passed within 
 the present month, did not come out of the Gila, River but from the upper wa- 
 ters. By reason of the Pescadero Cut, which has been reopened at an expend- 
 iture of some $300.000 by the people of the Imperial Valley, the flood waters 
 were safely carried by without danger of inundation to the Imperial Valley. 
 This bill has, among other provisions, one giving priority in the matter of de- 
 veloping hydroelectric power possibilities to communities, which would, to my 
 mind, have the effect of cutting out competition on the part of public-utility 
 companies, such as the large companies now supplying California and Nevada 
 with hydroelectric power. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Would you object to my asking you a personal question at this 
 time? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. No. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I have been told that you have considerable financial interest 
 yourself in the California power companies. Is that true?
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 193 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I am interested, and have been for years, in one of the 
 smaller companies out there, and in a company that, by the way, has furnished 
 hydroelectric power to the Imperial Valley. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. What company is that? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. The Nevada and California Electrical Corporation. I think 
 they furnish the Imperial Valley with current through one of their subsidiaries, 
 either the Holton Power Co., or the Southern Sierra Power Co. I am not 
 familiar with the details of the business, because I have no part in the man- 
 agement, but it goes without saying that having established distribution lines 
 in there, any further development of hydroelectric power in that neighborhood 
 would put that company in an ideal position, as it would benefit through being 
 allotted its proportionate share of the hydroelectric power developed. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You are short of power now, are you not? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I do not think so. 
 
 Mr. SWING. In other words, there is more demand than you can supply? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. Like every other company out there, they have not been 
 able to keep up with the demand for hydroelectric power. There is an absolute 
 field for further development of that industry there and in all the other 
 Western States. At the present time agriculture, perhaps, is the field upon 
 which those companies depend for their greatest consumption that is, in pump- 
 ing for irrigation purposes. New things are being developed all the time, so 
 that really the hydroelectric business is only in its infancy. There will be a 
 growing and ever-increasing demand for power, and I think we are only on 
 the eve of that development. So far as that is concerned, I think the possi- 
 bilities of the Colorado River should be carefully considered, and that they 
 should be developed, but we must be careful to develop them along proper lines. 
 I do not want to see Los Angeles, with its very apparent desire and I say that 
 unhesitatingly to bond its citizens for the purpose, going into the hydro- 
 electric j tower business, in competition with public utility companies, which com- 
 panies are financed by private resources. 
 
 Mr. SWING. There is no competition by the city of Los Angeles, is there? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I am not sufficiently posted to say, but my information is 
 that they bought out public utility companies that had put in distributing lines 
 by which they were furnishing current to citizens of the city, where, as in 
 ether States, they were under the regulation of the railroad commission. Where 
 their earnings are regulated, they are not allowed to earn above a certain 
 percentage on their investment, based upon the appraised value of their prop- 
 erty, with a certain amount set aside for depreciation, etc. Therefore, the 
 consumers were protected in the matter of charges. Now, in this Boulder 
 Canyon proposition, it seems to me very apparent that there is a definite intent 
 and purpose on the part of the administration of Los Angeles to definitely 
 establish the city of Los Angeles, a municipality, in the business of develop- 
 ing, producing, and distributing hydroelectric power in competition with public- 
 utility corporations, whose earnings are regulated by the commission. 
 
 Mr. HAYUKN. I am sure that you will be interested in reading the state- 
 ment before this committee made by Mr. Crisswell, the president of the City 
 Council of Lets Angeles, in which he discussed that very feature. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I am sure that I shall not miss reading a page of the 
 testimony. 
 
 The people of Denver in the development of their city will have to look 
 to the waters of what we term the western slope, or the Western part of the 
 State, over the divide, to supplement the water needed for domestic purposes 
 in the city of Denver eventually. At the present time, it is proper and urgent 
 that they should be looking ahead, as the city of Los Angeles did when it 
 went 200 to 2.~tO miles in the interior tit take up water rights. If the city 
 of Denver should look ahead with a view to acquiring water, it would have 
 to be diverted on the headwaters of the Colorado River. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKN. I presume that the question of the diversion of water out- 
 side of the basin will be considered by the Colorado River Commission before 
 it reaches any final conclusion as to the allocation of the waters of thsit 
 stream. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. Undoubtedly : that is one of the problems that must be 
 attended to out there. So far as that is concerned, my feeling personally is 
 that there should be no difficulty on the part of the States getting together 
 in u proper agreement for the allocation of the waters of that stream. So 
 far as Colorado is concerned, and I believe that Wyoming is in the smne sit-
 
 194 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 uation, the volume of water carried through those States is largely in excess 
 of what either or both Stares can expert to use under any future plans that 
 any man living to-day can devise. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Did you say Colorado and Utah? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I said Colorado and Wyoming. I would not like to say 
 as to Utah. Utah is a little farther down the stream. It is a great and 
 growing State, with wonderful agricultural possibilities, and I do not know 
 to what extent its territory can be irrigated by water from the Colorado 
 River. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. What do you think of the Glen Canyon irrigation project in 
 Utah? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I do not know about that. There is one strong reason for 
 developing the waters at the head of the stream for beneficial use. and that is 
 because the water goes back into the river through seepage. The return flow 
 to the stream is very great. In the San Luis Valley, in Colorado, at the head- 
 waters of the Rio Grande. I can show you places where the water, after having 
 irrigated large areas of land, requires sulnlrainage in order to take it away. 
 There are many places where water which has already irrigated land is brought 
 to the surface and used again for the irrigation of other lands, and then goes 
 into the river. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. How far down from the dam? 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. For instance, up at the headwaters of the Rio Grande, there 
 is the so-called farmers' dam, which is less than half a mile wide, impounding a 
 vast volume of water. There is another dam on one of the main tributaries, 
 known as the Santa Maria Dam. which is away up in the hills. At certain 
 times, when they desire to irrigate, they take the water out through the liead- 
 gates into the river channel. The water is conducted down to the point where 
 they take it out for use. For instance, the town of Del Xorte is between 75 
 and 100 miles farther down the stream than the farmers' dam and (><> miles 
 below the Santa Maria Dam. They there turn the water into the main ditches. 
 which are as wide as the length of this room, say 30 feet. That is the width 
 of one of those principal ditches, and they range in depth from 5 to 7 feet. 
 Perhaps 6 feet is the average. 
 
 They take the water out into the laterals and distribute it over the territory, 
 and in covering an area of three miles square they will get enough drop or 
 enough dip of the land to take the underflow out again and bring it to the top 
 of the land. Then it will go 3 or 4 miles farther, and find its way back into 
 the stream. That water is used over and over again. I am familiar with the 
 fact that in irrigation there are great losses through evaporation. That is gen- 
 erally conceded, but, at the same time, there is a great recovery through seepage 
 and the return of the water to the stream. So in the case of Glen Canon. Utah, 
 the amount of water that would be taken out would irrigate the Utah lands, and 
 a portion of the water would return to the main channel of the stream. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. The Glen Canon Dam site is located in Arizona, instead of Utah, 
 and there is no irrigable land in Utah below it. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I am confusing that with another site in Utah. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. I think that you must have in mind the Flaming Gorge Project 
 which has been highly recommended by some eminent engineers. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. There are several reservoir sites further up the Colorado, 
 and I believe the experts on irrigation problems would generally testify that the 
 greatest benefit that can be derived from water for irrigation purposes is by 
 beginning its use as nearly as possible to the headwaters. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE, I was talking about this project in Utah. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I will not detain the committee any further, except to sa.T 
 that in a matter of this kind it is very necessary to take into account all of tin- 
 questions that enter into the consideration of the subject rather than to con- 
 fine your investigations to the possibilities of one project. 
 
 Mr. SWING. May I make this suggestion, that I am going to ask the com- 
 mittee at the first opportunity after the recess, probably the last of August or 
 the 1st of September, to have the hearings printed and a copy sent to the Colo- 
 rado River Commissioners and other persons interested in the matter, with 
 an announcement of the date of the future hearings. Then they can read 
 the hearings and have the advantage of preparing their statements in relation 
 to them, and they can be here at that time to present their case to the committee. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. That would be the ideal way in which the committee mem- 
 bers could get the information they want.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 195 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think you will agree with me that the development of the Colo- 
 rado River is one of the biggest propositions before the American people to-day. 
 It is simply a question of evolving a workable scheme. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. You spoke of the power possibilities of this stream : There 
 is a dam site above the Grand Canyon as well as below it. ^ There is a dam site 
 at the junction of the Grand and Green Rivers where the hydroelectric power 
 that might be generated would be more centrally located with reference to the 
 points of use than would be the case if it were generated at the Boulder Canyon 
 site. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Swing, will you point out to the Senator where the projects 
 are? Will you point out the Flaming Gorge Project to him on the map? 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think the Senator is about as familiar with that as I am. 
 Here [indicating} is the Flaming Gorge Site, and here [indicating] is the 
 Boulder Canyon Site. 
 
 Senator PHIPPS. I do not know that I have anything further to say this 
 morning. I thank the committee for its attention. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. SAMUEL D. NICHOLSON, A UNITED STATES 
 SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Mr. Chairman, of course, it is agreed by everybody that 
 the distribution of the waters of the Colorado River presents quite a problem, 
 and I take it that there will be no money appropriated by Congress until the 
 Colorado River Commission makes its report. I feel quite confident that there 
 will be no measure enacted by the Senate appropriating money for the pur- 
 pose of building the Boulder Canon Dam until such time as the Commission 
 makes its report. 
 
 Mr. SWING. It was suggested by Mr. Hoover that an appropriate paragraph 
 could be put into the bill protecting the upper stream States, and not continue 
 to carry as a hangover several projects in California and Arizona that are con- 
 stantly menaced by Hoods, such as was experienced in the Palo Verde Valley. 
 You know of the destructive floods there. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. That is true from what I have read. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You could have your rights protected by a reservation in the 
 bill that when the commission reaches an agreement, that agreement shall 
 cover the projects authorized to be constructed in this bill. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. If an agreement that would protect our rights on the 
 Colorado River could be arrived at we would not want in any manner to prevent 
 the construction of a dam. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I mean if the legislation carried a paragraph which provided 
 that when the Colorado River Commission readied an agreement that agree- 
 ment should govern all the works constructed hereumler. Would not that 
 be sufficient? 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. No, I do not think so. I would not want to say that 
 I would agree to that, or that we would bind ourselves to accept the findings 
 of this commission as final. That would be a question of whether we felt 
 that our interests had been properly protected. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I mean if it is ratified. Of course, you are acquainted with the 
 Hood menace down there? 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. And you know that it is a real and actual menace. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. 1 agree that we are making pretty rapid progress now, 
 and that the appointment of this commission was highly desirable and neces- 
 sary. Now when they make a finding, I think all of us will have a better 
 viewpoint from which to see what our relative rights are in the matter. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Did you know that Mr. Hoover, the chairman of that commission, 
 has been before the committee and has quite fully presented that side of it? 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. I did not know that. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. He made quite a statement. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. What did he say? 
 
 Mr. SWING. He said that this legislation should be pui through without 
 further delay, and that it could carry a paragraph amply protecting all up- 
 stream situations. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Where is this paragraph? 
 
 Mr. SWING. Mr. Hoover suggested it. 
 
 Mr. VAILK. The bill was prepared before Mr. Hoover appeared before the 
 committee.
 
 196 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Let us look at it from another viewpoint : Suppose we 
 should agree to the proposition that you gentlemen have submitted, that there 
 should be such a saving paragraph in the bill, binding us as to the finding of 
 this commission, or to abide by its findings 
 
 Mr. SWING (interposing). The commission's findings can only be binding 
 when unanimously adopied by the legislatures of the seven Stsites concerned 
 and confirmed by the action of Congiv 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. That is another question that has been developed, be- 
 cause it is necessary to have the legislatures of the seven States to agree to 
 the findings of the commission before they can be ratified by Congress. 
 
 Mr. SWING. That would not alter your rights. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Now, if that be true, and I have no doubt it is, you 
 can readily see that we should proceed along common-sense lines. We must 
 deal with one another in an honest, just. ;md straightforward manner. It must 
 be a settlement that is equitable to all of the States, or they will not adopt 
 or approve the findings of the commission. Therefore. I take it that if we 
 work along together and attempt to help one another, we will not obstruct 
 the work of the commission, and we will get somewhere. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You have kept in touch with this matter, have you not? 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Not as closely as I should have liked. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I mean in touch with the work of the Colorado River commission. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. Just in a general way. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Do you not recognize from the hearings that the principal ob- 
 struction to the reaching of :in agreement by the Colorado River commission 
 has been the contention or claim on the part of representatives of States that 
 all of the water and snow that fell within their boundaries in the basin of this 
 river belonged to them forever that is, water that they could not possibly use 
 now, and could not possibly use 100 years from now? You know, of course, 
 that that was their contention, and that has been the reason why the commis- 
 sion could not reach an agreement. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. I know that has been the contention. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You do not defend that proposition before this committee, do you? 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. I can tell you very briefly my position in the matter : 
 As you gentlemen know. 62 per cent or 64 per cent of the water in the Colo- 
 rado River has its source in Colorado. I think 17 or 18 per cent of it has its 
 source in Wyoming. In other words, about 80 per cent of the water in the 
 Colorado is furnished by Colorado and Wyoming. The city of Denver now has 
 a population of nearly 300,000 people, and we have no reserve waters upon 
 which to fall back to meet the future increase or growth of the city of Denver. 
 Of course, naturally, in the next 2.1 or 30 years Denver will be a city of 600.000 
 people, and we will then be compelled to go to the western slope and get 
 water for future use. Of course, it is quite difficult at this time to say what 
 quantity of water is going to be required for the future use of the city of 
 Denver, but the citizens of Colorado will have to be guaranteed, or they will 
 have to be protected in their full rights, as to the quantity of water that they 
 feel the future will require. It is not a question as to the quantity of water 
 that we will require to-day, but the quantity that we will probably require 
 forty or fifty years hence, based on increased population. That relates not 
 only to the needs of the cities, as there is a great deal of land in Colorado 
 that is available for reclamation purposes, and it can be reclaimed by irrigation 
 when the waters are diverted across to it, either from the Rio Grande River 
 or the Colorado River. Now, the citizens of Colorado, I think, can be relied 
 upon to extend to you people a square deal. All that they ask for is that you 
 extend to them a square deal in the matter. That is the way I look at the 
 matter. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM N. VAILE, MEMBER OF CONGRESS 
 FROM FIRST COLORADO DISTRICT. 
 
 Mr. VAILK. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a brief statement along the 
 same line. We have in Colorado four principal streams that rise in that State, 
 namely, the Platte. the Arkansas, the Rio Grande, which flow to the east, and 
 the Colorado, which flows to the west. The mountains of Colorado furnish a 
 large part of the water supply for that whole western territory on both slopes of 
 the Rockies. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Which of those rivers will furnish the most water to the Colorado? 
 
 Mr. VAILE. There is more water in the Colorado River. The Rio Grande does
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 197 
 
 not stay very long in Colorado. It flows southeast, and goes out of the State. 
 The people of Colorado have been rather injured by the construction of works 
 outside of the State which have established priorities, or, at least, have estab- 
 lished equities, in the judgment of the Interior Department. 
 
 Mr. HA YUEN. And, also in the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. VAILE. Well, it has worked both ways. They have confirmed the doctrine 
 of prior appropriation, upon which we rely. They decided with us on that in 
 the Kansas and Colorado case and against us in the Colorado and Wyoming case. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. It is evident from the Supreme Court decisions that if an 
 equitable arrangement could be made between the several States of the Colorado 
 River Basin that it would be highly advantageous. 
 
 Mr. VAILK. Yes; ami that was the purpose of the law providing for that com- 
 pact between the several States. In the first place, there was a treaty with 
 Mexico that guaranteed the flow. I do not know the exact proportion, but the 
 general effect was to guarantee the flow of water along the boundary line, and 
 under that treaty irrigators in southeastern Colorado have been deprived of 
 water to which they are justly entitled for their homesteads which, in many 
 cases, were located before the treaty with Mexico was made, or, at least, at 
 a very early date. Then there was the construction of the Elephant-Butte 
 Dam. with the result that the Hio (irande waters have been tied up as far as 
 their use by Colorado people is concerned. Denver is a city of more than 
 250,000 population, and is growing rapidly. There is a very large territory 
 to the east of it. 
 
 Mr. SWING. Is it agricultural land? 
 
 Mr. VAILE. Yes. 
 
 Mr. SWING. You want to divert water from the Colorado River for the irri- 
 gation of lands, from which the water will not again enter the river by seepage? 
 
 Mr. VAILE. Certainly; we rely upon the doctrine of prior appropriation to 
 beneficial use. of course, there are two extreme views. One extreme view is 
 that a State is entitled to all the water that rises within its boundaries, and 
 the other is that the State through which the water flows is entitled to it. Of 
 course, as between those two positions, there is ground for reasonable com- 
 promise. 
 
 Mr. SWING. If the State of Colorado claims all of the water that flows from 
 within its boundaries, let them pay the millions of dollars of damages done by 
 those waters in Hooding the I'alo Verde Valley. 
 
 Mr. VAILK. They do not claim that responsibility. 
 
 Senator NICHOLSON. That is what we are proposing to do that is. to take 
 this water and divert its course so that you will not be damaged by floods in 
 the river. 
 
 Mr. VAILE. .We do rely upon that doctrine of prior appropriation to bene- 
 ficial iise, but that doctrine will evidently have to have some modification in 
 the interest of States below as well as States above, wherever State lines in- 
 tervene. That can be worked out through agreements among the seven States 
 interested. I do not know that the city of Denver will oppose this legislation, 
 but we do want to be sure that rights shall not. be acquired before an agree- 
 ment is reached among the States. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. EDGAR WALLACE, LEGISLATIVE REPRE- 
 SENTATIVE OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR. 
 
 Mr. WALLACE. Mr. Chairman, sometime ago I appeared before this com- 
 mittee on a general reclamation bill. It was the Smith-McNary bill and the 
 Bankhead bill that were pending before the committee at that time. I then 
 stated the general position of the American Federation of Labor on matters of 
 reclamation. Since that time a committee has been appointed by the American 
 Federation of Labor, and they made a report which has been adopted. With 
 your permission. I would like to read one paragraph from the report, and will 
 insert the balance of it in the hearing. 
 
 Mr. LITTLE. Without objection, the report will be included in the hearing. 
 
 Mr. WALLACE. The paragraph definitely pertainim: to the bill before the 
 committee is headed "The Colorado." ami reads as follows: 
 
 "The possibilities of the Colorado system dial lenses adequate description. 
 Immense tracts of land, the richest in the world, can throughout this valley 
 and the deserts, be brought under a hiirh state of cultivation which will neces- 
 sitate towns and cities, manufacturing and railroads, as the development 
 continues.
 
 198 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 " The reclamation of desert and swamp, the building of good roads and canals. 
 and adequate housing plans might well absorb our attention and interest MS 
 in these crucial times. That nation that can build, while other nations decay, 
 is the nation that will endure." 
 
 Now. Mr. Chairman, that last phrase, of course, "the nation that can build 
 while other nations decay," is the crux of the matter, according to our ideas. 
 The American Federation of Labor recogni/es that to-day there is a vast amount 
 of unemployment, even though there is a little betterment on account of the 
 farmers getting a little better price for their products. We know, gentlemen, 
 that then- are millions of men unemployed. I call your attention to the fact 
 that the coal miners have been on strike for almost three months, and yet 
 there is no shortage of coal. What does that mean? It means that the indus- 
 tries are not running, or they would have absorbed that amount of coal that 
 was on hand long ago. Therefore, as I have said, there are many millions of 
 men out of employment. We see in every project for the reclamation of land 
 possibilities for homes and possibilities for other industries in other sections 
 of the country that will be called upon to furnish the materials for building 
 dams, for building homes, and for building the railroads that will go into those 
 possible reclamation projects. 
 
 Now, we favor this project, as we do the others referred to. We see the 
 extreme necessity and the evidence that there is not only possible the reclama- 
 tion of more land, but there is danger at the present time of homes already 
 built and to land already reclaimed of be'ng destroyed. It would intensify 
 the situation throughout the country if that calamity should come to pas*. 
 It seems to us that at a time like this speed is necessary. The opportunity 
 is here and the necessity is here. Men should be given an opportunity to build 
 homes, and men should be put to work. Our foreign relations are out of joint, 
 and our foreign trade is out of joint. Why should we not now put all of our 
 energies into developing this country, and making this a happy country for 
 working people, with an opportunity to employ themselves and to employ each 
 other? Is it a question of economy V Yes: but I do not think it is good 
 economy to save money at the cost of the people of this country who arc looking 
 for work, while there is urgent need for the work that they can do. I do not 
 believe that we should hesitate to mortgage the future for the benefit of pros- 
 perity, and that is what reclamation means. We are making homes for our 
 children, and in order that their children may live on in the future. Hence, if 
 we spend money in order to do this work, and if. in order to spend the money. 
 we must mortgage the future, we are doing it in behalf of future generations. 
 
 I do not believe there is anything more I wish to say. 
 
 Mr. HAYDKX. The committee is always glad to have the benefit, of your views. 
 Your previous statement in behalf of the Smith-McNary bill was very helpful. 
 The support that has been given to the entire problem of the reclamation of 
 waste land in the United States by the American Federation of Labor is 
 sincerely appreciated by this committee and by everyone interested in that 
 great question. 
 
 (The report submitted by Mr. Wallace is as follows:) 
 
 " Your committee, after carefully considering the matter submitted to it, 
 beg leave to render the following report: 
 
 " We feel that, while the present dislocation exists throughout the world, 
 with industry stagnant and unemployment and its attendant suffering grow- 
 ing worse each day, it behooves us, in the name of humanity and of our 
 country, to work out a constructive program that will, in addition to al- 
 leviating the existing situation to a large extent, establish those works that 
 will ever redound to the dignity and progress of our Government and the 
 welfare of our people. 
 
 "We have carefully analyzed the need and opportunity for real, necessary 
 constructive works, and have considered what we think are of the most im- 
 portance, in housing, reclamation, and water transportation and power con- 
 struction. 
 
 "We have generalized this entire matter under three captions, name'y : Re- 
 clamation of the desert contiguous to the great Colorado River system and 
 including other worthy reclamation projects in other parts of the country : 
 development of the plan to connect the Great Lakes with the St. Lawn-nee 
 for deep-water shipping; and the fullest development of the Mississippi sys- 
 tem in its entirety. 
 
 " In the general reclamation of the Colorado and other similar though 
 smaller projects, we have in mind the inclusion of reclamation plans in general.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 199 
 
 " THE COLORADO. 
 
 "The possibilities of the Colorado system challenge adequate description. 
 Immense tracts of land, the richest in the world, can throughout this valley, 
 and the desert, he brought under a high state of cultivation which will 
 necessitate towns and cit : es, manufacturing and railroads. as> the development 
 continues. 
 
 "The reclamation of desert and swamp, the building of good roads and 
 canals and adequate housing plans might well absorb our attention and 
 energies in thesv crucial times. That nation that can build, while other na- 
 tions decay, is the nation that will endure. 
 
 "All general plans of reclamation of swamp, arid and cut-over lands might 
 generally be classed with this enterprise. The price of one dreadnaught would 
 go a long way toward financing one of these enterprises. It has been, esti- 
 mated that the value of the land reclaimed under the Mississippi projec> 
 would triple the cost of construction. 
 
 " THE MISSISSIPPI. 
 
 ''(me of the ideas that has come under discussion for many years, is the full- 
 est development of the water system of the Mississippi and its principal tribu- 
 taries. Most of the activities of local politicians in the years gone by have been 
 in the direction of the " i>ork barrel" method, trying to improve some locality 
 or creek, in a temporary manner, when it was often really tributary to a larger 
 system. 
 
 " The development of the Mississippi system in its entirety would automat- 
 ically do many things, beside making seaports of some of our inland cities. 
 With the enterprise under way, building from the headwaters of the Missouri, 
 the Ohio, and the Illinois Rivers down to New Orleans, it would create an out- 
 let by water for the produce of St. Louis, Chicago. Kansas City. Pittsburgh, and 
 other localities directly to Mexico, either coast of South America, or to the 
 world. 
 
 "This would also he true of imports. The leveeing of this wonderful water 
 system would automatically do many other things. It would prevent the 
 periodical disastrous floods, it would reclaim millions of acres of rich laud, and 
 do away with disease. It would require many years to construct This work 
 properly, and in the meantime while the rest of the world is writhing in trou- 
 ble and uncertainty, this gigantic enterprise would stimulate to its best form 
 every line of human endeavor in our country, our unemployed would be put at 
 useful and profitable work, it would require clothing, housing, food, and pay 
 rolls, steel, concrete, and machinery, and in the meantime the public would 
 have something healthier to think about other than the "open shop" fights or 
 the beating down of labor, and all other values. 
 
 " \Ve are well equipped to embark on such an enterprise. The idea of a canal 
 connecting the Atlantic with the Pacific Ocean, across the Isthmus baffled the 
 world. Annies of men died like flies in the effort of France to build the canal. 
 We did it and did it so well that before it was completed, hundreds of tourists 
 and sightseers were gong to the Canal Zone for their health. 
 
 " We believe that the general conference should authorize the drafting and 
 the introduction of three separate bills, one dealing with the Mississippi project, 
 one with the St. Lawrence project, and a general reclamation bill to deal with 
 the great Colorado project in the entirety, and similar smaller plans as they 
 exist in the various parts of our country. 
 
 "These are necessary and worthy enterprises at all times, and will redound 
 to the comfort and profit of all generations to come. It is especially proper 
 that the people at large should lend every effort to inaugurate at least one of 
 these projects at the earliest possible moment, and thus bring industry and 
 progress hack into our national life." 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. THOMAS C. YAGER, ATTORNEY FOR 
 COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT. 
 
 Mr. YAGEU. Mr. Chairman. I appear here in behalf of the Coachella Valley 
 County Water District. That organization covers most of the territory of the 
 Coachella Valley. We have approximately K'.s.ooo acres of irrigable land, or 
 land that is susceptible of irrigation by gravity flow from the Colorado Hivei. 
 We are interested in this project, not entirely from the satndpoint of the
 
 200 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 development of our new area, hut we are interested in it from the standpoint 
 both of irrigation and protection. Most of our valley is below sea level. The 
 town of Indio is '22 feet below sea level, and gravity flow into the district 
 would extend a short distance north. The Salton Sea. which ran into the 
 valley in 1905, covers a jxirtion of the Coachella Valley, and if it were not 
 stopped, it would have covered all of it. Therefore, we are interested in this 
 project from the standpoint of protection, and vitally so. We are also inter- 
 ested in it from the standpoint of development in the Southwest. Four years 
 ago we were here pleading with this committee and with Congress for legisla- 
 tion which would permit of the development of this territory, and. in your 
 wisdom, you saw lit to pass a bill asking for a further investigation. 
 
 Those investigations have been made and the re]K>rts submitted to this Con- 
 gress by the Secretary of the Interior recommending the construction of this 
 project. It has been indorsed by Secretary Hoover, after he had familiarized 
 himself with the project through all the hearings, held in the West by the 
 Colorado River Commission. It has been indorsed by the engineers of the 
 Reclamation Service, and it has been indorsed by many competent engineers 
 of the West. We believe in the possibility and the feasibility of this project, 
 and I am instructed by the Coachella Valley County Water District as its repre- 
 sentative to give to you our unqualified indorsement of the Swing bill, 11. U. 
 11449. This development, gentlemen, is the life of our valley. We are prac- 
 tically at the limit of our present water supply. The irrigated area 'that we 
 now have is irrigated from artesian wells. We have approximately 10,000 acres 
 under cultivation, and our supply is about at its limit. We are using about 
 the limit of the water supply at the present time, and if we intend to go 
 ahead in that valley, we must look to other sources for water, and this is the 
 only source we can look to. Therefore, we ask you to pass this legislation. 
 AV'e need it for protection and we need it for development. 
 
 We have no disposition or desire to interfere with any of the rights of the 
 upper States, nor do we believe that the construction of the Boulder Canyon 
 Dam will interfere with any rights of the upper States. Over 17,000.000 acre- 
 feet of water are passing the Yuma project yearly that is going to waste, and 
 that water could be placed upon the arid lands of the West, making an agri- 
 cultural empire. It would not interfere at all with development in the upper 
 States, as all agree there is sufficient water for every acre in the watershed. 
 It would supply power, and, by the way. this power is a by-product of the de- 
 velopment. We need that power to help pay for the construction. It is a 
 part of the development, and this territory is not entering into this project with 
 the idea of being a competitor of any power company, but it is an asset that 
 Hows from this development. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. How many acres are under irrigation in the Coachella Valley? 
 
 .Mr. YAGER. Approximately 10,000 acres. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. How many additional acres could be placed under irrigation by 
 this proposed project? 
 
 Mr. YAGER. There are approximately 138,000 acres susceptible of irrigation 
 from gravity How of the Colorado River. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. At what price could the agricultural industry there take ad- 
 vantage of this opportunity for additional water, or what price per acre could 
 they afford to pay? 
 
 Mr. YAGER. Mr. Hayden has made the statement that that land is reasonably 
 worth $200 per acre. I think we can go further that that. We raise a class 
 of crops there that are very valuable, such as dates, grapes, etc. There is 
 really no price that we can place on an acre of dates. There is no competition 
 in the United States to the production of dates, and enormous returns can be 
 made. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. My statement was that every acre of irrigated land in the 
 lower Colorado Valley was worth at least $200. 
 
 Mr. YAGER. I think we can absolutely concur in that, although in this par- 
 ticular locality the land is probably worth a good deal more. The grape crops 
 there are the 'first on the markets. They receive from $500 to $1,000 per acre 
 from grapes yearly. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Is the additional land to be irrigated in the public domain or in 
 private ownership? 
 
 Mr. YAGER. A portion of the land in the Coachella Valley is in the public 
 domain, and a portion of it is in private ownership. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. How was that land in private ownership acquired? They could 
 not take it up under the homestead law, could they? How was title acquired
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 201 
 
 to the land that was in the public domain? I am referring to the land that is 
 now under irrigation. 
 
 Mr. YAGER. The public land in that vicinity has been withdrawn from entry, 
 but prior to its withdrawal, it was taken up by homesteaders and tinder the 
 desert land law. water from wells, or underground water being used for its 
 reclamation. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. The district only includes the lands there in private ownership? 
 
 Mr. YAGER. It includes practically the entire valley at the present time. 
 
 The people of the Southwest are a unit in their desire to have this project 
 constructed, and have shown their good faith and sincerity by contributing 
 heavily to the cost of the report and investigations, submitted to you by the 
 Secretary of the Interior in order that your committee and this Congress might 
 have full and complete information upon which you could base intelligent legis- 
 lation, providing for the development of this great national resource. 
 
 We further appeal to you and submit that it is the proper duty and function 
 of this Government to help its citizens in this case as it has in others and to 
 relieve them from the constant flood menace that threatens their destruction 
 when they themselves have spent millions of dollars and exhausted every re- 
 source in their efforts to control the floods of this river, and failing now look 
 to you for help. 
 
 In 1905-6 the Colorado River broke its banks and ran rampant through 
 tl'.e cultivated area of the Imperial Valley, inundating that vast stretch of 
 land now lying in the Imperial and Coachella Valleys and doing millions of 
 dollars of damage, and formed what is now called the Salton Sea. Just recently 
 the Colorado River broke through the levees of the Palo Verde Valley, River- 
 side County. Calif., and has again done millions of dollars of destruction and 
 damage to the cultivated area in this district, although this district has built 
 numerous levees and is to-day carrying a heavy bonded indebtedness for moneys 
 it has spent to protect itself from the ravages of this river. Other districts along 
 the lower reaches of the Colorado River have been seriously damaged and have 
 si tent large sums of money in their efforts to protect their lands from floods, 
 but all these expenditures have been made at different points along the river 
 in the construction of dikes and levees ; draining the pocketbooks of the farmers 
 in this vic'nity and yet they have not gone to the heart of the problem and 
 permanently protected themselves. 
 
 The Secretary of the Interior under your direction and the direction of Con- 
 gress here presents to you a solution of the problem', which has received the 
 indorsement of some of the most competent engineers of the West. 
 
 The construction of this project as provided in this report, in addition to the 
 desilting and equating the flow of the river and protecting this property from 
 damage, provides an adequate and practical water supply and irrigation canal 
 for the irrigation of approximately a million acres of land within the United 
 States and this land, one of the most productive areas the United States has; 
 and. gentlemen, here let me emphasize again the fact that very little, if any. of 
 the produce and crops that will be grown on this acreage will come in competi- 
 tion with crops grown in any other part of the United States. On account of 
 the early season and extreme heat, the grapes, cantaloupe, onions, lettuce and 
 all such crops are harvest CM!, sold, and used before the crops of other localities 
 are mature. This produce to a large extent is shipped East to supply the eastern 
 demand and upon a bare market and the money received from the sale of this 
 produce is spent with your eastern manufacturer in buying farm implements 
 and machinery, dry goods, automobiles, and general merchandise, nearly all of 
 which is manufactured on the eastern coast or at least east of the Mississippi 
 River. This development thus is of great benefit to the eastern manufacturer, 
 merchant, railroads, and other business branches. 
 
 oiiu-r witnesses have told you of the demand for power in the Southwest and 
 the value of the power to be developed by the construction of the Boulder I>am 
 and that the power is of sufficient volume and value to bear the entire cost of 
 the dam. affording primarily flood protection and the equating of the river for 
 irrigation. 
 
 We thus present to you a problem that will solve itself if you will provide the 
 legislative machinery and start it in motion. 
 
 Private power companies have fded upon the river and have offered to build 
 such a dam for the power alone, showing their faith in the financial and engi- 
 neering soundness of the project, but, gentlemen, that river is a great national 
 asset, belonging to the people of this country, over which this Congress has juris- 
 diction, and this Government is the only agency that can properly allocate the
 
 202 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 benefits to be derived in its development and is the only agency in which the 
 people of the Southwest are willing to entrust this undertaking. 
 
 I can do no more than assure you gentlemen that the people* whom I here 
 represent are desirous and anxious that this project he built and that they urge 
 you to pass this legislation, the soundness and feasibility of which have been 
 passed upon by competent engineers. 
 
 Mr. HAYUEN. As this is the concluding hearing of the committee on this bill 
 until after the recess of the House. I ask permission to insert in the record 
 two letters that I have received from the Director of the United States Geologi- 
 cal Survey, and a telegram from the State water commissioner of Arizona with 
 reference to the proposed investigation by representatives of the State of 
 Arizona, the United States Reclamation Service, and the Geological Survey of 
 the irrigation possibilities in my State from the waters of the Colorado River. 
 Mr. George H. Maxwell, who appeared before this committee not long ago. 
 has conceived the idea that there might possibly be irrigated from the Colorado 
 Kiver as much as two and a half million acres of land in Arizona. Of course, 
 an engineering investigation will be required to determine just what can be 
 done. In a letter to me sometime ago lie stated: 
 
 "I have an engineer now at work on plans and estimates of cost of the 
 Arizona cut-off and the Arizona Highline Canal, and you will be surprised when 
 I am able to send you a statement of the results of his calculations. They will 
 demonstrate beyond question that the cost of this work will be more than 
 covered by the additional power developed, leaving only the cost of the com- 
 paratively inexpensive distribution systems below the divide to be borne by the 
 lands reclaimed with water brought through the Arizona Highline Canal." 
 
 (The letters and telegrams submitted by Mr. Hayden are as follows:) 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
 
 UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL STKVEY, 
 
 \Vnxliiniitoii. Mill/ /N, _/.'>.?.'. 
 Hon. CARL HAYDKX, 
 
 House of Representatives, 
 
 MY DEAR MR. HAYDEN : With reference to your interview on May 1(5 with 
 Mr. P. S. Smith and Mr. G rover relative to the suggested survey of a higli- 
 line canal from the proposed Boulder Canyon reservoir to lands in the Gila 
 River Valley : 
 
 It is believed that a survey of a single canal line, which would be very 
 expensive, might not lead to a conclusion in regard to the feasibility of watering 
 all or a considerable part of the lands suggested for irrigation, because of the 
 possibility of alternate routes some one or more of which might be cheaper and 
 better. I believe that it would be better to make topographic surveys of critical 
 areas; such, for example, as the upper end of the proposed canal line where 
 the topography will probably be found to be very difficult for canal location 
 and construction, the region where the crossing of the Williams River would 
 have to be made, and the divide between Bouse Valley and the Harqua Hala 
 Desert. Such surveys would yield informaion which might lead to a definite 
 decision as to the feasibility of the project and at the same time give informa- 
 tion which would be of value in connection with other projects. 
 Yours very cordially, 
 
 GEO. OTIS SMITH, Director. 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR. 
 UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL STRVEY, 
 
 \\'<ix}riti</toti. .linn- .'T, /.').?.>. 
 Hon. CARL HAYDEN, 
 
 Hotise of Representatives. 
 
 MY DEAR MR. HAYDEN : In reply to your telephonic inquiry relative to recon- 
 naissance of lands irrigable from Colorado River in western Arizona : 
 
 Arrangements have been made for an investigation to be made during this 
 field season by three engineers to be detailed from the office of the State water 
 commissioner, the Reclamation Service, and the Geologival Survey. Mr. F-. C. 
 La Rue will represent the Geological Survey, but I am not advised that the rep- 
 resentatives of the other two organizations have yet been designated. It is ex- 
 pected that these engineers will determine the location and approximate area 
 of lands which may be irrigated economically either by gravity diversion or 
 pumping from Colorado River. 
 Yours very cordially, 
 
 GEO. OTIS SMITH, Director.
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIIST. 203 
 
 PHOENIX, ARIZ., June 28, J!>.>.!. 
 Hon CARL HAYDEN. 
 
 House of J'eitrcxcntatircx. WaxJiiiififtD). I). C.: 
 
 Arrangements practically made with Reclamation Service and Geological Sur- 
 vey for an engineer from each department with our engineer to head a party 
 to investigate and determine all possible irrigable lands in Arizona from Colo- 
 rado River. Arizona has about $18.000 for the purpose, which is insufficient 
 for complete detail work. 
 
 W. S. NORVIEL, 
 State Water 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. If these representatives of the two bureaus of the Interior De- 
 partment and the State of Arizona make this proposed engineering investiga- 
 tion at an early date. I am sure that much valuable information will be ob- 
 tained which I hope will ultimately result in the reclamation of considerable 
 areas of land in 'Arizona which have heretofore been deemed worthless for 
 agriculture. 
 
 Furthermore, I would like to direct the attention of the committee to the 
 fact that there are three areas of land in the Colorado River Valley in Arizona 
 that have long been recognized as susceptible of irrigation. The first is Mo- 
 have Valley above Needles, comprising about 27,000 acres. The second includes 
 over 100,000 acres in the Colorado River Indian Reservation near Parker, and 
 the Third consists of about IN. (XXI acres in the < 'ibola Valley. 
 
 Much data has been published by the Government relative to irrigation in 
 the Imperial Valley. There are also accessible a number of Government pub- 
 lications containing detailed information regarding the Yiuna project, but little 
 or nothing has been printed with respect to the irrigation possibiltes of any 
 of the three projects I have just mentioned. I have here a report prepared by 
 C. A. Engel, an engineer of the Indian Service. His report was prepared at 
 an expense of over $100,000, about half of which came from the proceeds of 
 the sale of lots in the town of Parker. I ask to have this report printed as 
 an appendix to these hearings, omitting therefrom most of the maps, drawings, 
 and photographs. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Is Mr. Engel an official of the Government? 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. Yes: he is an engineer of the United States Indian Service. 
 He has made a full and detailed engineering report covering a gravity irriga- 
 tion project on the Colorado River Indian Reservation. I also have here an 
 irrigation report on the Fort Mohave Indian Reservation. I shall boil it down 
 so as to make it as brief as possible, and will omit all the photographs. I 
 likewise have some information relative to the Cibola Valley. I ask unanimous 
 consent to have all the data that I have mentioned printed as an appendix 
 to the present hearings. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. I am under the impression that we are limited as to the amount 
 of money we can spend for such a purpose, and we will put the request in this 
 way, that if the appropriation of the committee is sufficient we will have it 
 printed. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I think it would be especially interesting to know what lands 
 can be developed in both California and Arizona by the average flow, and how 
 much could be developed by waters stored in a reservoir. I think this would be 
 Interesting information. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. I think it would be very valuable as a supplement to the report 
 we have already had printed. 
 
 Mr. HAYDEN. There is no doubt about the authority of the committee to have 
 this data printed. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. If we have sufficient appropriation for the purpose, the clerk will 
 please send it to the Printing Office to lie printed in the manner indicated by 
 Mr. Hayden. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MB. ELMER W. HEALD, REPRESENTING THE 
 AMERICAN LEGION OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Mr. HKALD. I desire to state very briefly that the American Legion of the 
 State of California, and. also the National American Legion, are in favor of 
 the Swing bill. We desire to see this legislation passed, because it will make 
 possible the reclamation of about 4iV2.00M acres of Government lands which can 
 be made available for soldier settlement. This bill in that respect is directly 
 in line with the policy of the Federal Government, because in I'.tl!) the United
 
 204 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Suites Government appropriated $110,000 for the purpose of making a survey 
 of all Government land to find possible locations for soldier-settlement schemes. 
 This money was turned over to the United States Reclamation Service, and 
 was used by them in making this survey. That survey showed that the largest 
 contiguous body of Federal land still unentered was in the lower Colorado 
 River Basin. This will make possible soldier settlement for a large number 
 of ex-service men. 
 
 This bill provides preferential settlement rights for ex-service men, in direct 
 line with the policy of the United States Government, as set forth in the 
 reclamation act and as recommended by Secretary Fall. I want to submit for 
 the record some resolutions indorsing the Swing bill. There is one other reason 
 why the American Legion is vitally interested in the Swing bill : You probably 
 know that the only successful soldier-settlement plan in operation today is 
 in the Imperial Valley. This plan was put into operation entirely by the 
 American Legion, and we have there now about 200 ex-service men. Judge 
 Swing showed me a clipping from a paper showing that a large number of ex- 
 service men, who are now receiving vocational training, are making application 
 for land under their scheme now in operation in the Imperial Valley. I will 
 tell you briefly what that scheme is under which the American Legion is help- 
 ing ex-service men to procure farms : The ex-service men who are receiving 
 vocational training under the Veterans' Welfare Bureau locate on a piece of 
 land, and they do not have to pay anything for three years. The owner of 
 the land is protected, because it is obligatory upon the trainees to plant crops 
 of a permanent character and the land is in this way greatly benefited and 
 improved. After three years he starts to paying on the purchase price. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. Does he pay interest during the first three years? 
 
 Mr. HEALD. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. BARBOUR. What is the rate of interest? 
 
 Mr. HEALD. The rate of interest is all the way from 5* to 7 per cent. At 
 the end of three years he starts to paying on the purchase price. 
 
 The legion works out a budget for the man in which a certain per cent of the 
 receipts obtained from crops grown on the land is paid to the land owner on 
 the purchase price ; practically all over and above the cost of operating the 
 farm is paid over to the land owner on he purchase price. He has 30 years in 
 which to purchase the land. 
 
 These men are interested in the Swing bill for two reasons: First, it is hard 
 for them to get credit at the present time, as has been explained here time 
 and time again by members of the southern California delegation, and testi- 
 fied to before the committee, that it is impossible to borrow money because of 
 the flood situation, and bankers are refusing to loan money any longer except 
 at a very exorbitant rate of interest. Consequently, these men are desirous of 
 seeing that condition changed so that they can secure loans on their farms. 
 
 At the hearings in 1919 before this committee the farm loan bank, through 
 Mr. Joyce, made a statement that they could not lend any money in the Im- 
 perial Valley because of the flood situation, the insecurity of the Imperial 
 Valley made it impossible for the farm loan banks to let out any money ; it was 
 too great a risk. 
 
 Mr. SWING. And because their water system was in Mexico. 
 
 Mr. HEALD. And because their water system was in Mexico. I have a letter 
 here which Mr. Joyce wrote to Mr. B. D. Irvine, in which he makes the state- 
 ment that if this legislation is passed it will solve the financial problem of the 
 Imperial Valley, so far as the Federal loan bank is concerned, and I want to 
 submit this to be included in the record also. 
 
 Mr. SWING. I ask also that this resolution be made a part of the testimony. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. If there is no objection, that will be done. 
 
 (The letter and resolution referred to are as follows:) 
 
 TREASURY DEPARTMENT. 
 
 Wailiinr/ton, May 16, 1M2. 
 Mr. B. D. IRVINE. 
 
 DEAR SIR: Pursuant to our conversation to-day. I desire to assure you I 
 am heartily in favor of S. 3fftl, the bill recently introduced by Senator Johnson, 
 of California. 
 
 If enacted into a law. the provision of this bill will, in my opinion, solve 
 the major problems of the Imperial Valley, which are to my mind the ques- 
 tions of adequate, dependable water supply and the flood menace. 
 
 It goes without saying, that when these two problems are solved, general 
 credit individually and collectively would be enhanced. In my opinion, the
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 205 
 
 enhancement of this credit will tend to lower interest rates, and to render 
 the financing of district improvements, such as drainage, etc., comparatively 
 easy, and under more favorable conditions than have prevailed in the past. 
 
 As you are aware, I am somewhat acquainted with the general conditions 
 of the Imperial Valley, and I should be glad indeed to render any assistance 
 of which I am capable in promoting its welfare and future development. You 
 are at liberty to call upon me any time I can be of assistance in advancing 
 the interests of Imperial Valley. 
 Yours very truly, 
 
 W. H. JOYCE, 
 Member Farm Loan Board. 
 
 The following resolution was adopted by the Imperial County Interpost 
 Council, American Legion, Department of California, in special session as- 
 sembled at El Centro, Calif., December 10, 1921, to be presented to Secretary 
 Fall at conference called by him in San Diego, December 12, 1921 : 
 
 We recommend : 
 
 (1) The immediate construction by the Government of the Boulder Canyon 
 Dam and the ail-American canal at Government expense and same to remain 
 under Government control. 
 
 (2) That the Government supervise the distribution of all power rights and 
 privileges. 
 
 (3) That ex-service men and women of the Nation be given a preferential 
 filing right to all arid or agricultural land under this project for a period of 
 at least 90 days. 
 
 (4) Owing to the fertility of the land within this project and the consequent 
 intrinsic value thereof when properly reclaimed from their desert state, that 
 disposition of such lands be made in areas of an average of 40 acres to one 
 applicant or entryman. 
 
 (5) That filings on these lands shall be nonassignable for a period of at 
 least 12 months from date of entry. 
 
 (6) that such applications to enter as now exist and which have not 
 been allowed, upon lands heretofore withdrawn, or which may hereafter be 
 withdrawn from entry by the Government Tinder this project be canceled. 
 
 (7) That the Secretary of the Interior be empowered to cooperate and con- 
 tract with such authorized State agencies as may be in position to assist in 
 the reclamation and irrigation of public arid lands and to dispose of portions 
 of such public lands to such State agencies, conditioned upon their assisting 
 ex-service men and women in the reclamation thereof in tracts not exceeding 
 an average of 40 acres to any one person. 
 
 BRAWLEY, CALIF., June 20, 1922. 
 ELMER W. HEAD, 
 
 Congress Hall, Washington, D. C.: 
 
 Executive committee approved proposition ; will wire indorsement, sending 
 resolutions to all posts; State organization of auxiliary also indorsed; details of 
 meeting in letter following. 
 
 C. E. NICE. 
 
 RESOLUTION NO. 12, OF THE AMERICAN T.ECION. DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA. 
 
 Whereas the American Legion, Department of California, has heretofore 
 in its conventions assembled indorsed and recommended the construction 
 of storage and diversion works in the lower Colorado River for the purpose of 
 reclaiming lands to be available for settlement by veterans; and 
 
 Whereas it appears that financial assistance from the Federal Government for 
 this purpose can not be obtained within a reasonable period of time; and 
 
 Whereas it appears that approximately three hundred thousand acres of 
 valuable Government land in Imperial, Coachella and adjoining valleys can be 
 reclaimed by the construction of what is known as Boulder Creek Dam, the 
 raising La gun a Dam approximately 15 feet, and proper system of diversion ; 
 and 
 
 1316 22 PT 4 2
 
 206 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 Whereas it appears that such works when constructed will provide facilities 
 for the development of electric power .sufficient to pay the whole cost thereof: 
 Now. therefore, be it 
 
 by the American Legion, Department of California, in convention 
 That we go on record as favoring the construction of Boulder Creek 
 Dam in the Colorado River, the raising of Laguna Dam and the construction 
 of proper means of diversion under such contacts and agreements with private 
 corporate interests as will make available the waters for reclamation of said 
 lands without cost to the lands, except possibly for diversion, and conditioned 
 upon said Government lands being made available for veteran settlement : and 
 we further recommend the granting of fifty thousand acres of said lands without 
 cost to the veterans' welfare board of this State, for land settlement under the 
 provisions of the State law, in the event said board shall make application for 
 the same. 
 
 We direct that copies of this resolution be properly authenticated and for- 
 warded to the proper authorities from which permission or concession must be 
 obtained to carry out the objects proposed. 
 
 Mr. HEALD. The second reason why ex-service men are interested in this 
 hill is because it provides for flood control and protection and sets forth a 
 unified, comprehensive plan for the development of the Colorado River by the 
 United States Government. The Swing bill, if enacted into law. will provide 
 water for 452,000 acres of very rich land available for ex-service men, which 
 land now, without W 7 ater, is worthless. I would also like to have it appear in 
 the record that the citizens of Imperial Valley have been represented here as a 
 unit by three delegates. I make that statement because it was stated by 
 Senator Phipps that the citizens of Imperial Valley as a unit have not been 
 represented before this committee. I represent not only the American Legion, 
 but also the people of Imperial Valley. 
 
 Mr. B ARBOUR. You reside in the valley? 
 
 Mr. HEALD. I reside in the valley and have resided there since my discharge 
 from the United States Army. 
 
 Mr. BABBOUK. At what place? 
 
 Mr. HEALD. Calipatria. 
 
 Mr. SWING. It has been stated recently that 100,000 ex-service men have ap- 
 plied to the Government, to Secretary Fall, for opportunities to secure farm 
 homes. Is that true? 
 
 Mr. HEALD. Yes; that is true, and I would like to have this Included in the 
 record, also a statement in an Associated Press report, quoting Secertary Fall 
 on the number of applications to the Interior Department for homes by ex-service 
 men. 
 
 (The statement referred to is as follows:) 
 
 "FLOODS OF OTHEB INQUIRIES SECRETARY GIVES FIGURES DISCLOSING NATION- 
 WIDE HUNGER OF EX-SERVICE MEN TO GET BACK ON FARMS. 
 [By the Associated Press.] 
 
 "Evidence of the desire of former service men to go back to the farm is con- 
 stantly reaching the Interior Department, Secretary Fall announced yesterday, 
 adding that more than 100,000 such applications have been received for employ- 
 ment in development of land. 
 
 "In addition, inquiries concerning available land are coming in by the hun- 
 dreds of thousands, the Secretary continued. 
 
 " ' The correspondence is largely Irom farm-trained men who are not appealing 
 for a gratuity,' he said, ' but are seeking an opportunity to acquire a home in 
 the land by utilizing their labor and experience.' 
 
 " ARE EXPERIENCED MEN. 
 
 " ' It is significant that the bulk of these inquiries generally come from States 
 wherein prices of agricultural land have reached such heights that opportuni- 
 ties for men with small capital to acquire a home are extremely limited. 
 
 " 'Among these States Illinois ranks first with 18.600 inquiries and applica- 
 tions for land. Farm land prices in this State average among the highest in the 
 Union.'
 
 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 207 
 
 " COME FKOM EAST AND WEST. 
 
 " ' Conditions are much the same in Indiana, Ohio, Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, 
 and Nebraska, where land hunger on the part of the war veterans is shown by 
 45,620 inquiries received. Of these, 26,900 made application for work in order to 
 secure a home. 
 
 " ' The arid and semiarid States show up with a total of 61,340 former service 
 men interested in home making on the land. The Southern States are repre- 
 sented by 27,780 and the Eastern States, including Pennsylvania, by 25,900. In 
 the Northern States of Michigan. Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the Dakotas there 
 are 14,460 veterans who have indicated a desire to obtain a farm home.' 
 
 "OFFERED ONLY 490 FARMS. 
 
 " The Reclamation Service, Secretary Fall said, during the past two years has 
 been able to offer former soldiers only 490 farms, although 50,000 inquiries were 
 received and 7,480 former service men formally applied for farms. 
 
 " In none of these cases, he added, could the Government offer financial assist- 
 ance, and the successful applicants were required to put up from $3.50 to $5 an 
 acre and an annual charge of upward of $1 an acre." 
 
 Mr. Swrxo. Mr. Raege of the national legislative bureau of the American 
 Legion started from his office to be here to testify in behalf of this bill, but 
 something has happened and he has not arrived. 
 
 Mr. HEALD. I would like to have permission to get a written statement from 
 Mr. Raege and file it with my statement. 
 
 Mr. SMITH. If there is no objection you may do so. 
 
 ( The statement referred to is as follows : ) 
 
 Mr. ELMER W. HEALD, 
 
 American Legion, Department of California, Washington, D. C. 
 
 DEAR MR. HEALD: In compliance with your request I am submitting the fol- 
 lowing statement on behalf of the national headquarters of the American Legion. 
 
 I am John Thomas Taylor, vice chairman of the national legislative committee 
 of the American Legion, with offices at 530-536 Woodward Building, Washing- 
 ton, D. C. The national organization urges favorable consideration of H. R. 
 11449, a bill to authorize the erection of a dam across the Colorado River for 
 the purpose of irrigating what is called the Imperial Valley in the southern 
 part of California and lands in Arizona. 
 
 At the last department convention of the American Legion the following reso- 
 lution was unanimously adopted : 
 
 " Whereas the American Legion, department of California, has heretofore 
 in its conventions assembled indorsed and recommended the construction of 
 storage and diversion works in the lower Colorado River for the purpose of re- 
 claiming lands to be available for settlement by veterans; and 
 
 " Whereas, it appears that financial assistance from the Federal Government 
 for this purpose can not be obtained within a reasonable period of time; and 
 
 "Whereas, it appears that approximately three hundred thousand acres of 
 valuable Government land in Imperial, Coachella, and adjoining valleys can be 
 reclaimed by the construction of what is known as Boulder Creek Dam, the rais- 
 ing of Laguna Dam approximately fifteen feet, and proper system of diversion : 
 and 
 
 " Whereas, it appears that, such works when constructed will provide facili- 
 ties for the development of electric power sufficient to pay the whole cost 
 thereof: Now, therefore, be it 
 
 " Resolved by the American Legion, Department of California,, in convention 
 assembled. That we go on record as favoring the construction of Boulder Creek 
 Dam in the Colorado River, the raising of Laguna Dam, and the construction of 
 proper means of diversion under such contracts and agreements with private 
 corporate interests as will make available the waters for reclamation of said 
 lands without cost to the lands, except possibly for diversion, and conditioned 
 upon said Government lands being made available for veteran settlement: and 
 we further recommend the granting of fifty thousand acres of said lands 
 without cost to the Veteran's Welfare Board of this State, for land settlement 
 under the provisions of the State law, in the event said board shall make ap- 
 plication for the same.
 
 208 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN. 
 
 " We direct that copies of this resolution he properly authenticated and for- 
 warded to the proper authorities from which permission or concession must be 
 obtained to carry out the objects proposed." 
 
 At the tirst national convention of the American Legion, held at Minne- 
 apolis, Minn., on November 11, 1919, it was resolved that the American Legion 
 urge that 
 
 " 1. Reclamation of unproductive lands by direct Government operation for 
 settlement by service men and women ; 
 
 " 2. That the administration of the same be decentralized : 
 " 3. That no heavy financial restrictions be imposed ; and further, 
 " 4. That the right of eminent domain be incorporated to prevent speculation." 
 The American Legion, therefore, urges that the Committee on Irrigation of 
 Arid Lands, having received favorable reports upon this project from both 
 the Secretary of Commerce and the Secretary of the Interior, report this bill 
 favorably to the House with the end in view that eventually ex-service men 
 and women may have an opportunity to settle upon this vast acreage in 
 southern California which has been so aptly described as the " Garden spot 
 of the West." 
 
 (Thereupon, at 11.45 o'clock a. m., the committee adjourned to meet again 
 at the call of the chairman.)
 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 PARTS 1, 2, 3, AND 4. 
 
 Bacon, Mr. John L.. mayor of San Diego, Calif. : 
 
 League of California Municipalities 73 
 
 Changes in Colorado River bed 75 
 
 Cost of maintaining levees 77 
 
 American and Mexican interests 79 
 
 Sundry resolutions 81 
 
 Crisswell, Mr. Ralph, president city council, Los Angeles, Calif. : 
 
 Hydroelectric power 100 
 
 City will take all power left after other cities have been supplied 101 
 
 Power should be allocated by the Government 103 
 
 Carr, Mr. W. J., Representative of Pasadena, Calif. : 
 
 Price of power 114 
 
 Government control of power 116 
 
 Durand, Prof. \V. P.. Stanford University, California : 
 
 Financial reimbursement 63 
 
 Power shortage 64 
 
 Demand for power ; 67 
 
 Conserving the oil supply 68 
 
 Government the only agent to develop power 69 
 
 Oil supply of the United States 70 
 
 Davis, Hon. Arthur P., Director of the Reclamation Service : 
 
 Report on problems of the Imperial Valley 20 
 
 Drainage basin of the Colorado River 21 
 
 Boulder Canyon and other reservoirs 23 
 
 Cost of Boulder Canyon Dam 29 
 
 Power receipts will pay for the dam 30 
 
 Reservoir will control the hazard of the river 32 
 
 Additional irrigation area 34 
 
 Decision of United States Supreme Court, Wyoming v. Colorado 36 
 
 Evans, Mr. S. C.. mayor of Riverside, Calif. : 
 
 Flood conditions Palo Verd Valley 110 
 
 Reimbursing the Government 112 
 
 Cooperation and use of power 114 
 
 Hoover, Hon. Herbert C., Secretary of Commerce: 
 
 The Colorado River Commission 52 
 
 Development of power 55 
 
 Agriculture given priority 56 
 
 Immediate need of power 59 
 
 The Government will recover the money invested 61 
 
 Heald, Mr. Elmer, representative California American Legion : 
 
 Attitude of the American Legion 203 
 
 H. R. 11449 carries preference right for veterans 204 
 
 World War veterans seeking land 206 
 
 Resolutions American Legion, Department of California 207 
 
 Hoodenpyl, Mr. George, city attorney, Long Beach, Calif. : 
 
 Boulder Canyon Dam necessary to protect Imperial Valley 105 
 
 Federal Government should not make profit from power 107 
 
 Allocation of water rights and power 109 
 
 Nicholson, Hon. Samuel D. : United States Senator from Colorado : 
 
 Protecting Colorado's rights 195 
 
 Denver's water supply 196 
 
 209
 
 210 DEVELOPMENT OF LOWER COLOEADO RIVER BASIX. 
 
 Nickerson, Mr. J. S., president Imperial Valley Irrigation Board : Page. 
 
 Valley statistics 123 
 
 Irrigation costs in valley and Mexico 123 
 
 Water shortage 126 
 
 Want of flood protection destroys credit 127 
 
 Money spent in Mexico 132 
 
 Comparison of costs 139 
 
 Sundry agreements 140 
 
 Emergency conditions 154 
 
 Phipps, Hon. Lawrence C., United States Senator for Colorado : 
 
 Colorado River Commission 191 
 
 Hydroelectric power 192 
 
 Competition 193 
 
 Denver's interest 193 
 
 Other dams and reservoirs 194 
 
 Swing, Hon. Phil D., Member of Congress, eleventh California district : 
 
 H. R. 11449 1 
 
 Report of Secretary of the Interior 4 
 
 Difficulty of operating across international boundary 7 
 
 Menace to Imperial Valley 10 
 
 Boulder Canyon Dam and Reservoir 15 
 
 Investigation of the project by the Government 19 
 
 Discussion of general conditions 20 
 
 Silver, Mr. Gray, Washington representative American Farm Bureau 
 Federation : 
 
 Electricity on the farm 121 
 
 Applied to moving trains 122 
 
 Vaile. Hon. William N.. Member of Congress first Colorado district : 
 
 Compact between States 197 
 
 Appropriation of water to beneficial use 197 
 
 Watson, Mr. Edgar, legislative representative American Federation of 
 Labor, " The Colorado." 
 
 Walker, Dr. W. H., president California Farm Bureau Federation: 
 
 Protection from overflow 117 
 
 Competition in production 119 
 
 Yager, Mr. Thomas C., attorney for Coachella Valley Water I'srrs Asso- 
 ciation : 
 
 Protection from floods 199 
 
 Development of additional areas 200 
 
 Southern California a unit for H. R. 11499 201
 
 University of California 
 
 SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY 
 
 Return this material to the library 
 
 from which it was borrowed. 
 
 RFC'D
 
 A 000099011 9