Page images
PDF
EPUB

sincerity. They were egotistical of the present State administration policies. They were selfishly the product of unseen forces.

The high-line canal is impractical, if not impossible, because of the physical and financial conditions attending. If the taxable property of the State could be bonded for double or treble its present value and the bonds sold for cash, there would be insufficient money obtained to construct it. Should it be constructed, the cost of the water at the land would prohibit its use. The engineering feat of driving a large multiple bore tunnel for a distance of 70 miles through a granitic schistose gniesoid rock formation, meeting with faults and intrusions susceptible to movements, is impracticable, if not impossible, of a successive conclusion. Future maintenance of such a tunnel, if completed, would be a most uncertain hazard.

I have been an observer of the varied moods of the Colorado River for 28 years. I am intimately acquainted with the river and its environments in the lower basin. I know the country through which the proposed high-line canal would run. As a prospector and mine operator I have learned something of the rocks of the country and am impressed with the utter falaciousness of the proposed canal and its 70-mile tunnel. The building of a large open canal for hundreds of miles, hanging on rugged and precipitous mountain sides of various rock formation and on the talus slopes of eroding hills, is a foolish financial gamble.

It is not my province to name a dam site on the Colorado River. That is a matter for the engineers. They are the court in that question. Engineers of unquestioned ability and integrity have given their testimony after long years of study and contact of and with the physical conditions of the Colorado River and its environments. Credence should be given such testimony and stress laid upon its importance, for it is in the sound and logical wisdom of such men that the great benefactions resulting from the harnessing of the water and power and dangers of the Colorado River will be consummated. My intimate knowledge of the vagaries of the Colorado River at all seasons of the year and for a period of over a quarter of a century, together with my experience with rocks, strengthen my faith in the ability and sincerity of those engineers who have selected the vicinity of Boulder Canyon as a site in the lower basin for the one great dam adequate for all present demands for safety, storage, and power. Later demands for further power can be easily met in a score of places without interference with any of the economical or efficient factors of the Boulder Canyon dam and reservoir.

The territory ceded by Mexico, the grants of the Louisiana Purchase, and the Gadsden Purchase cover all the drainage basin of the Colorado River embraced within the United States. These grants conveyed everything within their areas; all things belonging to the mineral, vegetable, and animal kingdoms; the solids, liquids, and gases. It was complete and final,

At the times of the forming of the States of New Mexico and Arizona the United States possessed all these rights of every kind and nature and could have conveyed them. However, paragraph 7, section 20, of the enabling act and made applicable to the State of Arizona reads as follows:

" That there shall be and are reserved to the United States with full acquiescence of the State, all rights and powers for the carrying out of the provisions by the United States of the act of Congress entitled ' An act appropriating the receipts from the sale and disposal of public lands in certain States and Territories to the construction of irrigation works for the reclamation of arid lands,' approved June 27, 1902, and acts amendatory thereof or supplemental thereto, to the same extent as if the said State had remained a Territory." Section 28 of the enabling act, in part, reads as follows:

There is hereby reserved to the United States and excepted from the operation of any and all grants made or confirmed by this act to said proposed State, all lands actually or prospectively valuable for the development of water power, or power for hydroelectric use or transmission, and which shall be ascertained and designated by the Secretary of the Interior within five years after the proclamation of the President declaring the admission of the State; and no land so reserved and excepted shall be subject to any disposition whatsoever of said State, and any conveyance or transfer of such land by said State, or any officer thereof, shall be absolutely null and void within the period above named

Article x, section 5, of the constitution of the State of Arizona reads as follows:

60

No lands shall be sold for less than $3 per acre and no lands which are or shall be susceptible of irrigation under any projects now or hereafter completed or adopted by the United States under legislation for the reclamation of lands shall be sold at less than $25 per acre: Provided, That the State at the request of the Secretary of the Interior shall from time to time relinquish such of its lands to the United States as at any time are needed for irrigation works in connection with any Government project, and other lands lieu thereof shall be selected."

Article X, section 6, of the constitution of the State of Arizona reads as follows:

"No lands reserved and excepted of the lands granted to the State by the United States actually or prospectively valuable for the development of water power or power. for hydroelectric use or transmission which shall be ascertained and designated by the Secretary of the Interior within five years after the proclamation of the President declaring the admission of the State, and no land so reserved and excepted shall be subject to any disposition whatsoever of said State, or by any officer of the State, and any conveyance or transfer of such lands made within said five years shall be null and void."

The enabling act empowers and makes it the duty of the Attorney General of the United States, in the name of the United States and in its courts, to prosecute such proceedings at law or equity as may be necessary and appropriate to enforce such provisions.

It appears, therefore, that the United States for the period of five years from and after the date of the proclamation of the President declaring the admission of the State of Arizona did have certain rights in the relinquishments of lands from the State, which lands are or shall be susceptible of irrigation under any project now or hereafter completed or adopted by the United States under legislation for the reclamation of lands, or of lands actually or prospectively valuable for the development of water power or power for hydroelectric use or transmission.

It appears further that the Secretary of the Interior within the stated period of five years did make reservations of land in the State of Arizona along and adjacent to the Colorado River in accordance with requirements as stipulated in the enabling act and as further recognized in the State constitution.

The enabling act of Arizona or the State constitution thereof makes no reference to the waters of the Colorado River. As a corporeal hereditament of the lands relinquished by the State at the request of the Secretary of the Interior such waters are now subject to appropriation only under the Federal statutes and the jurisdiction of the Federal Power Board.

Arizona is blessed that a large portion of this great national asset is within the State and upon its boundaries. If permitted of development, Arizona would profit greatly. Further than this, Arizona's rights are based only on a justifiable allocation of the waters of the stream and of power, electrical and other, generated from such waters as are warranted by present and future demands coincident to a like and equal consideration of the rights and demands of the other States of the basin as provided in the Colorado River compact.

The preponderance of argument at the Phoenix meeting supported the highline canal, the Bridge Canyon Dam, etc. It opposed Boulder or Black Canyon projects and the Swing-Johnson bill. This does not mean that all the people of the State of Arizona, or even a majority of them, are opposed to the development of the Colorado River at Boulder Canyon or of the All-American Canal. It means that they have listened solely to the talk and publicity of those factions who for reasons known to themselves and guessed by others have been and are persistently eloquent upon the theme of saving for Arizona that belongs to all the people.

I believe that the great majority of the people of the State of Arizona have faith in the U'nited States Government and would trust it to protect its rights as citizens. This is a situation, however, that has not been presented to them for consideration. They have seen everything from the viewpoint and in the light of the anticompact factions. Had there been powerful influences to present the other view to the people of Arizona, the compact would have been ratified on its first presentation to the State legislature. Very respectfully submitted.

LE ROY V. Root.

The CHAIRMAN. This will conclude the hearings for this week, and when the committee adjourns it will stand adjourned until Tuesday morning, 10.30 o'clock of next week. It is hoped by all of the committee that we may finish our work next week, at which time we will have before us representatives of the States of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming. If any member of the committee desires to continue this work this week, with any witnesses, of course we shall be glad to hear them, but next week we will hear other witnesses, and if you have any names to suggest the chairman will be glad to hạve them.

Senator Johnson. I wish to ask the permission of the chairman to present a brief responding to the brief which has been sent in by Mr. White, of Phoenix, Ariz., and which I shall wish to be made a part of the record.

The CHAIRMAN. Will it be ready so that it can be put in next week? Senator Johnson. Oh, yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The committee will now stand adjourned until 10.30 o'clock a. m. next Tuesday, December 15, 1925.

(Thereupon, at 11.50 a. m., the committee adjourned to meet again at the same place at 10.30 o'clock a. m. on Tuesday, December 15, 1925.)

Х

[ocr errors]

1 3. Congrécia, aconate. Canoattice

erinding and reclamation.

[ocr errors]

is week ed until od br all at which of Colo.

of the

HEARINGS

[blocks in formation]

S. Res. 320

again

ber 15,

(68th Congress, 2d Session)

DIRECTING THE COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND
RECLAMATION, OR A DULY AUTHORIZED SUBCOM-
MITTEE THEREOF, TO MAKE A COMPLETE INVESTI-
GATION WITH RESPECT TO PROPOSED LEGISLATION
RELATING TO THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT

OF THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN

DECEMBER 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, AND 22, 1925

PART 6

Printed for the use of the Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation

WASHINGTON
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

1926

72578

COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION

CHARLES L. McNARY, Oregon, Chairman WESLEY L. JONES, Washington.

MORRIS SHEPPARD, Texas. LAWRENCE C. PHIPPS, Colorado.

THOMAS J. WALSH, Montana. FRANK R. GOODING, Idaho.

JOHN B. KENDRICK, Wyoming. RALPH H. CAMERON, Arizona.

KEY PITTMAN, Nevada. TASKER L. ODDIE, Nevada.

FURNIFOLD MCL. SIMMONS, North Carolina. SAMUEL M, SHORTRIDGE, California. C. C. DILL, Washington. HIRAM W. JOHNSON, California.

HENRY F. ASHURST, Arizona.

H. K. KIEFER, Clerk

« PreviousContinue »