T D 
 
 225 
 
 S4 
 
 U63 
 
 MAIN 
 
 UC-NRLF 
 
 V.5".if;. %? 
 
 ~ l 
 
 I 
 
 ! SUPPLY, CITY OF SA^ FRAN 
 
 FOB LAKE ELEANOR AND HETCH HETCHY VALLEY 
 RESERVOIR SITES. ACT OF FEBRUARY 15. 1901. 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
 
 March 1, 1913. 
 'or <tii</ lunfrti ftf supervisors of th< <-/ti/ <fn<! county of San 
 
 ". ( 'alifornia ; 
 
 K.MKN : In the matter of the permit issued on May 11, 1908. 
 [on. James K. (iartield. Secretary of the Interior, to the city 
 raiirisvo. for certain reservoir and other rights of way within 
 mite National Park, upon what are known as the Lake 
 land I letch Iletchy Valley reservoir sites, there are two dis- 
 eediiiii- pending before the Department of the Interior. 
 rule issued on February 25. 11)10, by the IIo" i>. A. Bal- 
 Tetary of the Interior, to the mayor and .er visors of 
 nid county <>f San Francisco, to show why the Hetch Hetchy 
 'servoir site should not be eliminated from said permit. The 
 application of the city and county of San Francisco for 
 nation of the said permit, so as to allow the immediate use 
 [etch I Tetchy Valley for reservoir purposes, 
 ^osemite National Park w T as originally created as a forest, 
 [on (not as a national park) by the act of Congress of Octo- 
 (90 (2(> Stats., 050). which provided: 
 
 vutioii shall be under the exclusive control of the Secretary of the 
 'hose duty ir shall be, as soon as practicable, to make and publish such 
 regulations as he may deem necessary or proper for the care and 
 mt of the same. Such regulations shall provide for the preservation 
 try of all limber, mineral deposits, natural curiosities, or wonders 
 id reservation, and their retention in their natural condition. * * *"* 
 
 |w of the fact that the provisions of law and the rules and 
 adopted by the Secretary were, in substance, the same as 
 >vided for the Sequoia National Park, and because the reser- 
 irrounded the tract of land known as Yosemite Valley, which 
 granted to the State of California for a public park by 
 !ongre,ss approved June 30, 18(54. Secretary John W. Noble, 
 inual report for 1800. called the reservation the " Yosemite 
 Park." and in subsequent acts of Congress this title appears 
 been used without being specifically adopted. In 1905 the 
 
 493712 
 

 2 3 
 
 WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAN 
 
 APPLICATION FOR LAKE ELEANOR AND HETCH HETCHY VALLEY 
 RESERVOIR SITES, ACT OF FEBRUARY 15, 1901. 
 
 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 
 
 March 1, 1913. 
 Tlie mayor and l><><ir<l i supervisors of the city and county of San 
 
 Francisco* ( 'olifomia. 
 
 GENTLEMEN: In the matter of the permit issued on May 11, 1908. 
 by the Hon. James K. Garfield. Secretary of the Interior, to the city 
 of San Francisco, for certain reservoir and other rights of way within 
 the Yosemite National Park, upon what are known as the Lake 
 Eleanor and Iletcli Iletchy Valley reservoir sites, there are two dis- 
 tinct proceedings pending before the Department of the Interior. 
 One is the rule issued on February 25, 1910, by the Ho^ E. A. Bal- 
 linger. Secretary of the Interior, to the mayor and ^ervisors of 
 the city and county of San Francisco, to show why the Hetch Hetchy 
 Valley reservoir site should not be eliminated from said permit. The 
 other is the application of the city and county of San Francisco for 
 a modification of the said permit, so as to allow the immediate use 
 of the Hetch Hetchy Valley for reservoir purposes. 
 
 The Yosemite National Park was originally created as a forest, 
 reservation (not as a national park) by the act of Congress of Octo- 
 ber 1, 1890 (20 Stats., 650), which provided: 
 
 said reservation shall le under the exclusive control of the Secretary of the 
 Interior, whose duty it shall be, as soon as practicable, to make and publish such 
 rules and regulations as lie may deem necessary or proper for the care and 
 management of the same. Such regulations shall provide for the preservation 
 from injury of all timber, mineral deposits, natural curiosities, or wonders 
 within said reservation, and their retention in their natural condition. * * * 
 
 In view of the fact that the provisions of law and the rules and 
 regulations adopted by the Secretary were, in substance, the same as 
 those provided for the Sequoia National Park, and because the reser- 
 vation surrounded the tract of land known as Yosemite Valley, which 
 had been granted to the State of California for a public park by 
 act of Congress approved June 30, 1864, Secretary John W. Noble, 
 in his annual report for 1890, called the reservation the " Yosemite 
 National Park." and in subsequent acts of Congress this title appears 
 to have been used without being specifically adopted. In 1905 the 
 
 493712 
 
CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. 
 
 States, of California receded^the Yosemite Valley to the United States 
 upea the cV^d'itim.tet it. 'should be held and maintained as a na- 
 tional park, and on June 11, 1906, this recession was accepted by 
 joint resolution of Congress, which specifically referred to the act 
 of October 1, 1890, and established certain boundaries between the 
 " Sierra Forest Reserve " and the " Yosemite National Park." 
 
 Within the exterior boundaries of the park there was a consider- 
 able number of tracts of land the title to which had passed from the 
 Government to private parties. These private lands included a 
 large part of the shores of Lake Eleanor and the greater portion of 
 the floor of the Hetch Hetchy Valley, as well as other tracts of con- 
 siderable area located in other portions of the park. The Depart- 
 ment of the Interior and many citizens and groups or associations of 
 citizens have repeatedly urged upon Congress that these private 
 holdings should be purchased by the Government, but Congress has 
 refused to appropriate money for this purpose. The private lands 
 at Lake Eleanor and Hetch Hetchy have been purchased by the city 
 of San Francisco, which has also acquired other valuable lands and 
 rights within the exterior boundaries of the park. Its holdings, 
 however, do not include the dam site. On February 15, 1901, Con- 
 gress passed an act (31 Stats., 790) entitled "An act relating to rights 
 of way through certain parks, reservations, and other public lands." 
 That act reads as follows : 
 
 Be it enacted ~by the Senate and House of Representatives of tlie United 
 States of America in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Interior be, 
 and hereby is, authorized and empowered, under general regulations to be fixed 
 by him, to permit the use of rights of way through the public lands, forest and 
 other reservations of the United States, and the Yosemite, Sequoia, and General 
 Grant National Parks, California, for electrical plants, poles, and lines for the 
 generation and distribution of electrical power, and for telephone and telegraph 
 purposes, and for canals, ditches, pipes and pipe lines, flumes, tunnels, or other 
 water conduits, and for water plants, dams, and reservoirs used to promote 
 irrigation or mining or quarrying, or the manufacturing or cutting of timber 
 or lumber, or the supplying of water for domestic, public, or any other beneficial 
 uses to the extent of the ground occupied by such canals, ditches, flumes, tun- 
 nels, reservoirs, or other water conduits or water plants, or electrical or other 
 works permitted hereunder, and not to exceed fifty feet on each side of the 
 marginal limits thereof, or not to exceed fifty feet on .each side of the center 
 line of such pipes and pipe lines, electrical, telegraph and telephone lines and 
 poles, by any citizen, association, or corporation of the United States, where it 
 is intended by such to exercise the use permitted hereuuder or any one or more 
 of the purposes herein named : Provided, That such permits shall be allowed 
 within or through any of the said parks or any forest, military, Indian, or other 
 reservation only upon the approval of the chief officer of the department under 
 whose supervision such park or reservation falls and upon a finding by him that 
 .the same is not incompatible with the public interest: Provided furtlier. That 
 all permits given hereunder for telegraph and telephone purposes shall be sub- 
 ject to the provision of title sixty-five of the Revised Statutes of the United 
 States, and amendments thereto, regulating rights of way for telegraph com- 
 
pauies over the public domain: Ami prorhlcd further. That any permission 
 jriM.'ii by the Secretary of the Interior under Ihe provisions of this act may he 
 revoked hy him or his successor in his discretion, and shall not be held to 
 confer any right, or easement, or interest in. to. or over any public land, res- 
 ervation, or park. 
 
 This is the so-called " revocable permit " act, under which rights 
 of way for electrical plants, transmission lines, canals, ditches, and 
 reservoirs are permitted through the public lands and forest reserva- 
 tions of the United States. The only national parks to which it 
 applies are the Yosemite, Sequoia, and General Grant National Parks, 
 in the State of California. The act was passed on February 15, 1901. 
 On October 15, 1901, the city of S,an Francisco, through the Hon. 
 James I). Phelan, then mayor, filed an application for reservoir 
 rights of way at Lake Eleanor and Hetch Hetchy. After considera- 
 lion of this application, Hon. E. A. Hitchcock, then Secretary of the 
 Interior, on December 22, 1903, refused the permit on the principal 
 ground that he did not have the necessary statutory authority. He 
 discussed the existing and available water supplies of the city of San 
 Francisco, and upon the information then before him, held that 
 (here were other adequate sources of supply available; but the con- 
 trolling consideration for his refusal of the permit was the construc- 
 tion placed by him upon the two acts of Congress above mentioned. 
 
 The city continued its efforts to obtain the permit, but on February 
 5. 1905, Secretary Hitchcock again reached the conclusion that the 
 permit " could not be granted without further legislation by Con- 
 gress." The Application was again renewed by the city before Sec- 
 retary Hitchcock's successor, Hon. James R. Garfield, and on May 
 1 1. 1908, Secretary Garfield granted the permit which is now r in force. 
 This permit provided that the city might develop the Lake Eleanor 
 reservoir site and that if this site when developed to its full capacity 
 should not prove adequate for the needs of the city the Hetch Hetchy 
 Valley could then be used as a reservoir. The permit is set out in 
 full in the report of the Advisory Board of Army Engineers made 
 on February 19, 1913. and contains other important provisions, which 
 need not be referred to at this time. 
 
 In October, 1909, Hon. R. A. Ballinger, then Secretary of the 
 Interior, instructed the Director of the Geological Survey and cer- 
 tain engineers of the Reclamation Service to investigate and report 
 ii[)( 11 the sources of water supply involved in the permit and upon 
 the necessity for the retention of the Hetch Hetchy Valley within 
 the terms thereof. On February 25, 1910, in view of the report made 
 of the results of this investigation, especially " as to the sufficiency 
 of the Lake Eleanor reservoir site when fully developed, and in view 
 of the importance of the public interests involved in this matter 
 and the Government's obligation in connection therewith," Secretary 
 

 WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. 
 
 Ballinger required the city and county of San Francisco " to show 
 why the Hetch Hetchy Valley and reservoir site should not be elimi- 
 nated from said permit." 
 
 At the request of the Secretary of the Interior ihe War Depart- 
 ment, by direction of the President, appointed an Advisory Board of 
 three Army Engineers to assist the Secretary of the Interior in pass- 
 ing upon the matters submitted to the Interior Department under 
 .the order to show r cause, and Congress subsequently appropriated 
 $12,000 to pay the expenses of this Advisory Board. A hearing was 
 held on May 25 and 26, 1910, and upon application of the city a post- 
 ponement was granted until June 1 5 1911, for the purpose of enabling 
 the city to furnish the necessary information for a proper determina- 
 tion of the important questions involved, and the city undertook to 
 furnish this information at its own expense and with due diligence. 
 The Advisory Board of Army Engineers Avas also authorized to pro- 
 cure such independent data and information as it deemed proper. 
 It has conducted an extensive investigation on its own account and 
 has made personal inspections of many of the proposed sources of 
 water supply and reservoir sites, including visits to the Hetch Hetchy 
 and Lake Eleanor. The order of continuance is set out in full in the 
 report .of the Advisory Board. 
 
 This was the situation when I became Secretary of the Interior in 
 March, 1911. Shortly thereafter the city applied for a continuance, 
 which was granted until December 1, 1911. Upon a further applica- 
 tion of the city the time was extended until March 1, 1912, and again 
 until June 10, 1912. These later applications were all granted by mo 
 with the greatest reluctance and only after pointing out to the repre- 
 sentatives of the city the importance of an early hearing, so that the 
 many difficult and intricate questions could be thoroughly considered 
 and ample time might be available for procuring such additional 
 information and permitting such additional discussion as would in 
 all probability be found essential as a result of the formal hearing. 
 Nevertheless, on May 28, 1912, the city again presented a request for 
 a further extension of time in which to secure and present its evi- 
 dence. It was demonstrated that the city would not be able to 
 present its case without a substantial extension of time, and I appre- 
 ciate quite fully the adverse conditions with which the present repre- 
 sentatives of the city have had to contend and many of which wore 
 practically unavoidable. A detailed schedule was prepared fixing 
 various dates on or before which the city would be able to make 
 documentary showing upon the different matters under investigation, 
 and it was required to make this showing in accordance with this 
 schedule. Appropriate periods were fixed within which the ob- 
 ject ors should have an opportunity to examine the matters presented 
 by the city and to answer them and a further period within which 
 
WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. 5 
 
 the city was to reply. The formal hearing was set for November '20, 
 1912, and later postponed until November 25, 1912. In September, 
 1011, I personally visited Lake Eleanor and Hetch Hetchy. 
 
 The oral hearing before me began on November 25, 1912, and con- 
 tinued until and including November 30. The reports and other 
 documents filed on and prior to this hearing included thousands of 
 printed or typewritten pages with financial and statistical tables, 
 diagrams, and maps. They are enumerated in the report of the 
 Advisory Board of Army Engineers. Nevertheless, as had been ap- 
 parent, the information was incomplete in important particulars and 
 it was found necessary or desirable to call for additional reports and 
 .statements. Dates were fixed within which these matters were to be 
 supplied, but it was not until the middle of January, 1913, that the 
 city completed its showing, including a draft of the permit which it 
 requested the department to issue as a modification of the permit 
 issued by Secretary Garfield. The modifications proposed were of 
 great importance and included a particular treatment of the interests 
 of the Turlock- Modesto irrigation district, which had not previously 
 been discussed. On February 1, 1913, the city authorities requested 
 that this new provision be further modified. To these modifications 
 the representatives of the Turlock-Modesto district have objected and 
 presented a substitute. The answer of the city to the proposed sub- 
 stitute was not received until February 15. Meanwhile, however, the 
 Advisory Board of Army Engineers was giving to the various en- 
 gineering questions submitted to it such consideration as was prac- 
 ticable in the uncompleted state of the record. The board was not 
 able to make its report to me until February 19, 1913. Since that 
 date the pressure of official business inevitable during the closing 
 weeks of an administration has prevented me from giving to this 
 report and to the entire matter to which it relates that time and 
 consideration which the nature and importance of the questions at 
 issue demand. 
 
 If it were clear that I should issue to the city of San Francisco a 
 permit of the general character it requests, it would have been and 
 would now be absolutely impossible within the time available to em- 
 l')ody the details of such a permit in a properly considered document. 
 This is a matter of the greatest regret to me as I had hoped to be able 
 at least to draft a permit embodying the provisions which, in my 
 judgment, should be contained in any permit for the use of the 
 Hetch Hetchy Valley as a reservoir site by the city of San Francisco 
 and the communities around San Francisco Bay. The importance 
 of doing this, however, is much reduced by the fact that I have 
 reached the conclusion that a permit for this purpose should not be 
 issued by the Secretary of the Interior under the existing law. This 
 conclusion is not based at all upon questions of detail connected with 
 
6 WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAX FRANCISCO. 
 
 the permit, but is based upon the fact that the only statutory 
 authority under which such a permit could be issued is the act of 
 February 15, 1901. 
 
 The first and main conclusion reached by the Advisory Board of 
 Army Engineers is as follows : 
 
 The board is of the opinion that there are several sources of water supply 
 that could be obtained and used by the city of San Francisco and adjacent com- 
 munities to supplement the near-by supplies as the necessity develops. From 
 any one of these sources the water is sufficient in quantity and is, or can be 
 made, suitable in quality, while the engineering difficulties are not insurmount- 
 able. The determining factor is principally one of cost; in some cases, how- 
 ever, such as the Sacramento, sentiment must be taken into consideration. 
 
 The project proposed by the city of San Francisco, known as the Hetch 
 Hetchy project, is about $20,000,000 cheaper than any other feasible project 
 for furnishing an adequate supply. The only exception is the filtered Sacra- 
 mento project, which in actual cost is about $30,000,000 greater than the Hetch 
 Hetchy project, but by discounting to 1914 becomes only $13,000,000 greater. 
 
 The Hetch Hetchy project has the additional advantage of permitting the 
 development of a greater amount of water power than any other. 
 
 I do not believe that the Secretary of the Interior should grant, 
 under the act of February 15, 1901, a permit in this case based upon 
 the principal determining factor of the difference in cost between 
 available alternative sources of water supply, whether that difference 
 be $13,000,000 or $20,000,000, or even more than $20,000.000. If the 
 Secretary were to do this, he would, in a certain important sense, be 
 placing a monetary value upon the preservation of the Hetch Hetchy 
 Valley in its present natural condition. He would be determining 
 that in order to save the expenditure of a certain sum of money by 
 the people of San Francisco the people of the whole country should 
 consent to change the present natural condition of the Hetch Hetchy 
 Valley. It may well be that such consent would be justified. It 
 depends upon the effect of the use permitted and upon the amount 
 of money saved, as well as upon other considerations. Such action, 
 however, should not be taken by the Secretary without a clearer 
 authorization by Congress than I am able to believe was consciously 
 intended when the act of 1901 was passed. In any event, such action 
 with respect to so important a feature of a national park as is iho 
 Hetch Hetchy Valley would constitute a precedent which should be 
 most carefully and effectively guarded before it is established. 
 
 This conclusion is not based upon the opinion that the conversion 
 of the Hetch Hetchy Valley into a reservoir or lake would so seri- 
 ously mar the scenic beauty of the valley as is contended by many of 
 the objectors to the city's application. I have been convinced that 
 the proposed use of the Hetch Hetchy as a reservoir will not require 
 undesirable sanitary restrictions upon the use of its waters! KM I 
 by the public, if the permit contains the provisions recommended by 
 the Advisory Board. If the use of the Hetch Hetchy Valley was 
 
CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. 7 
 
 clearly necessary for the city of San Francisco and its adjacent com- 
 munities, I believe that such change in its condition and such loss or 
 impairment of scenic beauty as might possibly occur would be amply 
 justified and Avould not be a matter of such serious moment as to be 
 at all controlling. It is indeed an open question about which real 
 differences of disinterested and intelligent opinion exist whether the 
 valley would not be as beautiful if it contained the lake created by 
 the dam as it is with its present natural floor. Nevertheless, the 
 valley should be retained in its natural condition unless ample justi- 
 fication exists for changing it. The act of October 1, 1890, creating 
 the reservation which is now the Yosemite National Park, provides 
 " for the preservation from injury of all * * * natural curi- 
 osities or wonders within such reservation and their retention in their 
 natural condition," and this provision should be followed unless there 
 is clearly some adequate justification for a different course. 
 
 I am unable to agree with the conclusion reached by Secretary 
 Hitchcock that the act of February 15, 1901, does not confer upon the 
 Secretary of the Interior technical legal authority for permitting 
 the use of the Hetch Hetchy as a reservoir site. The act of 1901 
 expressly mentions the Yosemite National Park as one of the reser- 
 vations to which it is applicable, and in express language the Sec- 
 retary of the Interior is authorized and empowered to permit the 
 use of rights of way therein " for water plants, dams, and reservoirs " 
 for " the supplying of water for domestic, public, or any beneficial 
 uses/' I can not find in the act of 1901 any limitation which makes 
 it subject by a process of construction or otherwise to the general 
 provisions of the act of 1890 with respect to the Yosemite National 
 "Park. I do find in the act of 1901 the provision that the permits 
 which it authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to grant shall be 
 issued only " upon a finding by him that the same is not incom- 
 patible with the public interest " ; and in view of the language of 
 the Yosemite reservation act of 1890 I believe that as a matter of 
 broad public policy, and not at all as a matter of necessary statutory 
 Construction, the natural condition of so important a natural curiosity 
 or wonder as the Hetch Hetchy Valley should not be radically 
 changed without the express authority of Congress embodied either 
 in a statute granting a permit and fixing its terms and conditions 
 or by an act conferring upon the Secretary of the Interior the power 
 to issue such a permit upon terms and conditions to be fixed by him 
 within broad general limitations. I have repeatedly urged that the 
 jjft of 1901 should be amended in this very way. 
 
 It is clear and it is conceded by the applicants for this permit 
 that it should not be granted except upon terms and conditions which 
 the city of San Francisco can be legally and effectively compelled 
 to observe. The act of February 15, 1901, does not in words author- 
 
8 WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAX FRANCISCO. 
 
 ize the Secretary of the Interior to impose " terms and conditions " 
 upon the permits issued by him, and it is vigorously contended by 
 other applicants under it for permits throughout the public domain 
 that the act is not susceptible of the construction that it does author- 
 ize the Secretary to impose terms and conditions in the permits for 
 which they apply. The act provides that the permits shall be issued 
 " under general regulations " to be fixed by the Secretary of the 
 Interior, and it expressly provides that these permits " may be re- 
 voked by him or his successor, in his discretion, and shall not be 
 held to confer any right or easement or interest in, to, or over any 
 public land, reservation, or park." General regulations have been 
 fixed by the Secretary which contain provisions which might be 
 held to impose certain general terms and conditions applicable to 
 all permits or to all permits of a particular class or kind. 
 
 I have repeatedly pointed out as vigorously as I am able that 
 this statute as it now reads is unsound in principle and injurious in. 
 practice with respect to both the public and the private interest af- 
 fected.. It is most unsatisfactory as a basis for the important ad- 
 ministrative actions that can be taken only under it. I have been 
 willing to issue permits under it only because these permits are by 
 the express terms of the statute made revocable in the discretion of 
 the Secretary. Were it not for this power of revocation the validity 
 of some of the general regulations and of some of the conditions 
 imposed in or under them might be contested by the permittees. The 
 existence of the power of revocation makes it possible to ignore 
 this question of statutory construction in the case of permits to 
 individuals or private corporations. The power of revocation, 
 however, is- an ineffectual weapon with which to enforce the terms 
 and conditions of a permit issued to a municipal corporation such 
 as the city of San JTrancisco. If that city and its adjacent com- 
 munities should invest the money of the tax payer in creating a 
 municipal water supply dependent on a reservoir in the Hetch Hetchy 
 Valley, no Secretary of the Interior would or should revoke the per- 
 mit in order to enforce terms and conditions which might otherwise 
 not be legally binding upon the city. If these terms and conditions 
 could not be enforced in and of themselves by direct action under 
 the permit, they could not practicably be enforced at all. I believe 
 that certain kinds of "terms and conditions " can properly be pro- 
 vided by or under " general regulations " as this expression is used 
 in the existing statutes. I have Keen unable, however, to see how the 
 special " terms and conditions " which clearly should be attached to 
 any permit to use the Hetch Hetchy could be included within any 
 "general regulations" which could be fixed by the Secretary under 
 the language of the act of 1001. These terms and conditions aiv in 
 
WATER SUPPLY, CITY OF SAN FE AN CISCO. 9 
 
 their very nature special and peculiar to this particular permit . as a 
 muling of the report of the Advisory Board will clearly show. 
 
 The foregoing considerations seem to me controlling upon the 
 pending application of the city. I therefore continue both this appli- 
 cation and the rule to show cause until application can be made by 
 the city to Congress for such action as Congress may deem proper in 
 the premises. I prefer not to express any conclusion based upon the 
 report of the Advisory Board of Army Engineers and upon my own 
 investigation and consideration as to whether Congress should or 
 should not expressly authorize the use of the Hetch Hetchy Valley 
 by the city of San Francisco and its adjacent communities, because 
 I have decided not to base any official action upon such a conclusion 
 now and because if I were now properly authorized to. take official ac- 
 tion I would prefer to secure some additional information and to give 
 some further consideration to certain features of the matter before 
 taking such action. Among these features are the bases and conse- 
 nt lences of the conclusions reached by the Advisory Board that 
 
 ili. use of the Hetcli IletHiy Valley MS a reservoir site is necessary if the full 
 flo\v of the upi>er Tuolunme is to be conserved 
 
 and that 
 
 the San Joaquin Valley is relatively less well provided with water than the 
 Sacramento Valley both as to rainfall and as to run-off of rivers. The demands 
 of the valley for complete, irrigation are in excess of the water available. 
 
 Many of the conditions which should be attached to any permit are 
 discussed in the report of the Advisory Board of Army Engineers. 
 I do not agree with all of the suggestions there made, and I believe that 
 other equally important terms and conditions should be imposed. 
 
 The precise manner under which the work of constructing a clam at 
 the Hetch Hetchy Valley would be carried on under any permit is 
 of the greatest importance if serious risk of injuring the scenic beauty 
 is to be avoided. I believe that a dam and a scenic road and other 
 works proposed by the city can be constructed in such a way as to 
 mar the beauty of the valley little, if at all", and even in some respects 
 to enhance the possibilities of enjoying this beauty. This, however, 
 can result only from conducting the work with the greatest skill and 
 without regard to those considerations of expense which quite uni- 
 formly control work of this character. I have no doubt that the city 
 would carry on its operations with a considerable degree of care, but 
 I believe that extraordinary measures of precaution should be taken 
 and that the work should be carried on not merely under plans and 
 specifications approved by the Secretary of the Interior, but that the 
 manner in which the work itself upon the ground is conducted should 
 be subject to supervision by competent representatives selected and 
 employed by him. 
 
10 WATER SUPPLY^ CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. 
 
 The questions connected with the use of water by the Turlock- 
 Modesto district and other irrigation interests, with the development 
 and disposition of the water power, and with many other conflicting 
 interests are so difficult and complicated that suggestions are made 
 either by the city or by the Advisory Board that they be left largely 
 to future disposition by the Secretary of the Interior. The func- 
 tions thus devolved upon the Secretary and the duties imposed upon 
 him will require the occasional or regular employment of experts, 
 engineers, and other assistants, whose compensation should not be 
 made a charge upon the General Government, but should be paid by 
 the beneficiaries of any permit that may be granted. In fact, in view 
 of the conclusion of the Advisory Board that the saving to the city 
 is the principal determining factor as to any permit, the whole ques- 
 tion of the payments which the city should make to the Government 
 as the custodian of the park requires more consideration than has 
 been given to it. 
 
 It is conceded that it would be unsound economics for the city of 
 San Francisco to duplicate the existing distributing system and that 
 it should acquire most if not all of the present sources of supply of 
 the Spring Valley Water Compan}^; and the Advisory Board base- 
 its report on this theory. It is the declared intention of the city to 
 purchase these properties as the beginning of its proposed municipal 
 water system and active negotiations have been carried on to this 
 end. These negotiations, however, have thus far proved unsuccess- 
 ful. I- do not wish any action of mine to be open to the construction 
 of expressing any opinion whatever as to the merits of the contro- 
 versy between the city and the company as to the value of the latter's 
 property, nor as to which portions of the property it would be ap- 
 propriate for the city to acquire. If they are unable to agree, both 
 parties should be compelled to submit to some impartial tribunal the 
 questions at issue between them, so that the company may receive 
 that to which it is fairly entitled and the city may not be required 
 to pay one dollar more than the real value of the property it should 
 acquire. 
 
 These questions, however, are merely illustrations of the large nuin,- 
 ber of important, although relatively minor, provisions of the pro- 
 posed permit which call for greater consideration, both as to -sub- 
 stance and as to the precise manner in which they should be worded, 
 than I have been able to give to them under the existing conditions in 
 the Secretary's office. 
 
 Respectfully, 
 
 WALTER L. FISHER, Secretary. 
 
 o 
 
RETURN 
 
 MAIN CIRCULATION 
 
 ALL BOOKS ARE SUBJECT TO RECALL 
 RENEW BOOKS BY CALLING 642-3405 
 
 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW 
 
 
 
 
 
 MAY U4 19: 
 
 15 
 
 
 RECEIVED 
 
 
 
 MAY 1 4 1995 
 
 
 
 CIRCULATION DEF 
 
 T. 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 FORM NO. DD6 
 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY 
 BERKELEY, CA 94720 
 
 klXL-LL. I