That should be completed in the rather immediate future, necessarily, because money is now invested in the water tunnel and water should be brought through it.

Senator JOHNSON. That work is being prosecuted by whom? Is it being prosecuted by the city or by private enterprise?

Mr. BULL. It is being prosecuted by what is known as the Moffett Tunnel district, which includes the Denver and the northwestern counties of Colorado.

Senator JOHNSON. That is, it is being prosecuted by the people themselves rather than by a private corporation?

Mr. BULL. Yes, sir.

Senator JOHNSON. That is, I assume, what would be akin to what we term a water district in the State of California?

Mr. BULL. Well, it is really a tunnel district. The water is also included with it.

Senator JOHNSON. The water is an incident to the tunnel, under your system?

Mr. BULL. I am not sure as to the statute, but the statute covers the building of both tunnels.

Senator JOHNSON. Do you wish the work on the Moffett Tunnel and the work of supplying Denver with municipal water deferred until there shall be some agreement in the upper basin of the Colorado?

Mr. BULL. I do not see how it can be now. It is within about a quarter of being finished.

Senator JOHNSON. You would hardly wish then that the matter of obtaining a water supply for the city of Los Angeles should be deferred until there was an agreement there, would you?

Mr. BULL. That is rather out of my line of work. I believe this, sir, that it is essential that all these things be done.

Senator JOHNSON. Surely; I quite agree with you.

Mr. BULL. Denver and Colorado are just as much interested in seeing the southern basin developed as the northern basin, because it is all one great economic development.

Senator JOHNSON. I think they are. I quite agree with you in that. And so far as domestic water supply is concerned, you deem it, as we do, of paramount importance, do you not?

Mr. BULL. It is absolutely important to the city.

Senator JOHNSON. Of course. People can not live without it any more than our people can live without a domestic water supply. And quite as important as that, too, is the protection of the lives of those who are threatened by flood on the Colorado. You would admit that, would you not?

Mr. BULL. Certainly.

Senator JOHNSON. Šo that so far as you are concerned you would throw no obstacles in the way of the development of either your part of the country or any other part of the country?

Mr. BULL. No; our only concern is to be sure that we are going to get water.

Senator JOHNSON. Surely, and we will try to aid you in that. That is all, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Are there any further questions? If not, we are obliged to you, Mr. Bull. That will end your presence before the committee.

Senator Kendrick, have you a witness?

Senator KENDRICK. Mr. Hopkins will go on at this time, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is Mr. S. G. Hopkins, of Cheyenne, for six years commissioner of public lands of the State of Wyoming; afterwards assistant secretary of the interior, for, I believe, four years, under Mr. Franklin K. Lane; now, I believe, commissioner of interstate water rights for Wyoming, an appointive position under the governor.

The CHAIRMAN. Very well, Mr. Hopkins, you may proceed.

STATEMENT OF S. G. HOPKINS, COMMISSIONER OF INTERSTATE WATER RIGHTS FOR WYOMING, CHEYENNE, WYO.

Mr. HOPKINS. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Carpenter's very able and exhaustive presentation has enabled me to abbreviate my discussion of the matter under consideration very much, and I shall occupy but a very limited amount of your time.

Wyoming's interest in the Colorado River situation lies in the fact that Green River, one of the two large streams that unite to form the Colorado, has its source in that State, and with its tributaries forms a large drainage basin in the southwestern part. According to the report of Mr. La Rue, an engineer in the Geological Service, published in Water Supply Paper 395, at page 133, the Green River drains an area in Wyoming of 17,340 square miles. A considerable portion of this area is mountain ranges and forests, but much the larger portion of it is rough pasture lands. The region is arid and this stream and its tributaries affords the only source of water supply for the reclamation of the lands in that basin. There is some difference of opinion as to the acreage in the basin in Wyoming that may ultimately be reclaimed by irrigation. Mr. La Rue, in Water Supply Paper 395, at page 158, estimates the area in Wyoming under irrigation at the time his report was made (1913) at 280,000 acres, and he estimates an additional area of 300,000 acres which ultimately may be irrigated.

In 1915 the then governor, now Senator, Kendrick, initiated a movement whereby a cooperative investigation by the State and the Department of Interior was made to ascertain the possibilities of reclamation of lands in the Green River Basin in Wyoming. Two eminent engineers, one selected by the State and one by the Department of Interior, spent considerable time in the investigation and study of the irrigable lands and water supply, and submitted their report to a board of review, composed of Elwood Mead, now Director of the Bureau of Reclamation; James B. True, then State engineer of Wyoming; and E. G. Hopson.

The conclusion reached by this board from the investigations made was that approximately 400,000 acres were under irrigation and in incomplete projects, and that approximately 600,000 additional acres could ultimately be reclaimed.

In view of the thoroughness of the investigation and studies made of the irrigation possibilities in this basin in Wyoming, the high

standing of the engineers who made it, and the eminence and experience of the members of the board of review, I take it as an accepted fact that there are approximately 600,000 acres which may yet be reclaimed in that basin, making a total area of land for which water will be required from the Green River and its tributaries in Wyoming of approximately 1,000,000 acres.

The reclamation and development of this additional area will mean much to Wyoming. What would it mean to the Imperial Valley to put under irrigation 600,000 additional acres? What would it mean to southwestern Arizona to add 600,000 additional acres such as the Yuma Mesa? It means the same to us in Wyoming. It will thus be understood by this committee how essential it is to our State to have reserved to it a sufficient supply of water with which to reclaim her lands in a normal way. We are not asking for water that belongs to Arizona or California. We would not dry up a single vineyard now growing in the Imperial Valley. We would not deprive those beau. tiful orchards in Yuma Mesa of the water that makes them so productive, but we do say that in all fairness, before additional orchards are planted, before great power projects are authorized there should be allotted to Wyoming a sufficient amount of water to take care of her limited supply of irrigable lands, and we are not asking, and we do not need, all the water that Wyoming contributes to the Colorado River.

After supplying the lands now irrigated the State is delivering at her southern boundary line between 2,000,000 and 3,000,000 acre-feet annually. California is asking the construction of a reservoir in the Colorado River that will hold 20,000,000 to 25,000,000 acre-feet of water, to be used for power, irrigation, and domestic use-mostly for the benefit of that State-yet she contributes not a drop of water to that stream. An appropriation for that reservoir carrying a priority that would be sustained by the courts would dedicate 600,000 acres of rich lands in Wyoming to everlasting desert waste, yet Wyoming contributes approximately one-sixth of the water of the river at Lees Ferry. Most of the lands to be irrigated in Wyoming lie in narrow valleys close to the tributaries of the Green River. They are surrounded by large areas of pasture lands. The irrigated areas will become feed yards for large herds of cattle. The soil is rich and productive.

I quote from Mr. La Rue's report referred to, Water Supply Paper 395, at page 133:

The altitude of the basin in Wyoming ranges from 6,000 to more than 13,000 feet. The growing season is short, but good crops are raised and a comparatively large area has been placed under cultivation.

In comparison with the value of the production in the lower Colorado River Basin, I quote from the report of the board of review, Elwood Mead, chairman, on the cooperative investigation, published in the thirteenth biennial report, State engineer of Wyoming,

1915-16:

The Salt River project in Arizona offers an excellent example of an irrigation project in the lower Colorado Basin. In 1913 about 186,000 acres were irrigated, the average diversion duty being 4.4 acre-feet per acre. Crops on 161,642 acres were valued at $4,552,879, an average of about $28 per acre. Of this aggregate value fodders amounted to 55 per cent and grain 22 per cent. or 77 per cent for the two. Alfalfa hay sold at $7 per ton, the average yield per acre being exactly 4 tons.

Thus an acre-foot of water diverted to this project produced about ninetenths of a ton of hay, valued at $6.36.

To compare the above with a typical Wyoming project, take the Shoshone project in northern Wyoming, with an altitude close to 5,000 feet. In 1913 the average yield of alfalfa was 2.31 tons per acre, the average selling price $6.50 per ton, the average crop value being thus $15.01 per acre. The water diverted totaled 1.55 acre-feet per acre.

Thus each acre-foot diverted at Shoshone produced 11⁄2 tons of alfalfa, valued at $9.68.

It will be seen that this comparison is quite favorable to Wyoming. It is true, as Mr. La Rue says, the altitude of these lands is high, the seasons short. The development has been slow. It will probably continue to be slow. As most of our lands yet to be irrigated lie in narrow valleys, close to the streams, and at a high altitude, the evaporation is very little and the return water very large. The engineers making investigation estimated the consumptive use of water in this basin at 1/2 acre-feet, while it is conceded that the consumptive use of water in the lower Colorado Basin is very much greater. From information obtained from practical irrigators on the tributaries of the North Platte River in Wyoming I am led to believe that the engineers have underestimated the amount of water which returns to the stream from the irrigation of such lands; but, accepting the report of the engineers as correct, it is evident that after we are permitted to first use the water upon our lands the most of it, or at least a very large part of it, will return to the stream to be used over and over again for power and for irrigation until it finally finds its way to the sea.

You have been told of the efforts of these seven basin States to agree upon an equitable apportionment of the water of the Colorado River. While the compact as agreed to by the commissioners representing the States has not been ratified by California and Arizona, I am not discouraged. There is in the heart of every American a spirit of fairness, a desire to give and require a square deal. The demand of the upper States to a fair share of the water which originates there for the development of their lands is so manifestly just that it must make a strong appeal to this committee and to the Congress.

While you represent individual States, you legislate for the benefit of the people of all the States. I believe you will hesitate before you will pass an act the result of which may rob Wyoming of the water that rises within her boundaries and that is so essential to make her lands productive. I do not desire to discuss the terms of the compact. Suffice to say it was agreed to by the commissioners representing the States and by Secretary Hoover, representing the Federal Government, after long and tedious negotiations. The legislature of no State has asked that its terms be changed. The Legislature of California found no fault with its provisions, and the conditions imposed in its ratifying act do not propose changes in its terms. Even the Arizona Legislature by resolution, which was vetoed by its governor, accepted the terms of the compact, but required before it should become effective an agreement between Arizona, California, and Nevada apportioning the water allotted by the compact to the southern basin States

But it may be asked, What can Congress do to help in this situation? It may be said that Congress can not compel the States to

ratify the compact. Of course not; but Congress can say that it will not enact legislation that will forever prevent the development of the lands in the upper basin States; it can direct the Federal Power Commission to suspend all power development on the Colorado River and its tributaries until such time as such development may proceed with justice to the equitable rights of the upper basin States. I recently made a visit to southern Arizona and California. I was impressed by the danger to those States by the floods of the Colorado River. I was impressed by the needs of the communities in southern California for more power and more water for domestic use for their increasing population. I was particularly impressed with the situation in the Imperial Valley and the necessity for an All-American Canal which would free those people from a foreign jurisdiction over the waterway that carries the water to their lands. I could not but feel that if my own State was properly protected in its right to the water for future development, what a pleasure it would be to me to lend whatever assistance I could to relieve their situation. I like to be constructive. I do not like to be an obstructionist, but the preservation of the right and the opportunity of my own State to develop in its own way and in its own time compels me to resist and oppose any plan that jeopardizes that right and that opportunity. In my judgment, there is an ample supply of water in the Colorado River to take care of the irrigation needs of that entire valley and some to spare.

As irrigation development proceeds it will be necessary to construct reservoirs and conserve the waters of flood season for use during the periods of lesser flow of the stream, and it has been shown to this committee that when that time comes there are many reservoir sites available for that purpose for service to the lower basin. We can not make the water run up hill; we can not draw the water from such reservoirs to our lands, and we have no opportunities for storing the flood waters in Wyoming that would be available for our lands, such as nature has provided for the benefit of the lower reaches of the river. The time will come when none of the waters of the Colorado River will be permitted to go to waste. The irrigation possibilities of the Colorado Basin are immense. Projects which are now not deemed feasible will ultimately be developed. Those who doubt the sufficiency of the water supply of the Colorado River should see what has been accomplished with the limited amount of water that flows in the South Platte River and its tributaries in Colorado.

I do not object to the Government undertaking the work that is proposed in the Swing-Johnson bill. I believe that it is work that the Government should undertake. I have no patience with the attacks that have been made upon the great work that has been accomplished by the Reclamation Bureau. It has been asserted that Government reclamation has failed. This I deny. Success or failure is measured by comparison. Compare the Government reclamation projects with those of privately owned and privately operated irrigation projects. The failures in irrigation projects, both Government and private, are because of the failure of the agricultural industry generally during the past several years.