Page images

development at Boulder Canyon. There may be objection to certain developments at Boulder Canyon. That is only one of the details that must be ironed out by a discussion and worked out,

Mr. MCGREGOR. There is lots of objection in California to Boulder Canyon also.

Mr. REID. May I ask you another question? Haven't you some idea on the part of the California delegation as to the method of controlling the appropriated and flood waters which might be stored in any reservoir which we would build on the river ?

Senator SWING. Ask that question again.

Mr. REID. Haven't you some idea, or your committee, of the method of control which might be used on any reservoir that might be built in the river, whether at Boulder Canyon or Black Canyon or whatever it may be?

Senator Swing. I can't answer that question. In fact I don't think so.

Mr. REID. You don't think you would be interested in the control feature of it at all?

Senator SWING. I didn't say that. That isn't what you asked me.
Mr. REID. You haven't any definite plan on it?
Senator SWING. We haven't any definite plan on it.
Mr. FINNEY. Do you mean between private or government control?

Mr. REID. I mean a division of waters and a control of your normal flows which is appropriated in the State of Arizona and California to-day. It seems to me like there are a lot of things to enter into the question of any construction, not only from Nevada's viewpoint but from California's, that you are just as interested in it as we are.

Senator Swing. There is one thing that Nevada wishes to know, and that is that the construction of this dam will be at or near a certain location.

Mr. REID. Let me ask you this in that connection

Mr. MADDOCK. I don't quite understand our parlimentary procedure. I have never participated in this particular arrangement, but an orderly procedure would be, having replied to Nevada that Nevada would tell us whether or not our reply is satisfactory, and I think we ought to settle that before we proceed to the next step.

Mr. REID. Probably would, but the idea I had in mind was that Mr. Swing's proposal there

Senator SWING. I thought I stated at the time my own thoughts upon the subject.

Mr. REID. I was trying to find out whether the California delegation was in a position to accept in its entirety the proposition that the reservoir might be built at Boulder Canyon without any reservations.

Senator SWING. That question has not been addressed to us directly yet. The question now to be answered is-

Mr. REID. We tried to answer that and if it is satisfactory-
Senator SWING. We will wait until Nevada replies to you.

Mr. REID. If it is satisfactory we are ready to proceed. If it isn't satisfactory it may be we can give you a better answer.

Mr. MADDOCK. I think if we had gone on that trip we would break down this reserve and get a little better acquainted and would not be so scared of one another. It looks like a lot of preliminary hours are being wasted by feeling the other fellow out.

Mr. BORDEN. Well, gentlemen, we consider this an answer in generalization with reservations similar to the speech made to us this morning. As far as the governor is concerned we can see no difference in this and the general trend of that talk. But the meeting was started off laying those premises and we feel that this answer is in that same line, a generalization without any definite statement as to action except with reservations.

Mr. REID. Well, have you gentlemen got any specific proposal that you want to make to have us give you a specific answer on in reference to that de. velopment?

Mr. BORDEN. A dam at Black or Boulder Canyon.
Mr. REID. You have made it two now instead of one.

Mr. BORDEN. The Boulder Canyon is a long one. The upper end is the Foulder site and the lower end is the Black Canyon site. They are about 50 miles apart.

Mr. SQUIRES. Twenty miles.

Mr. REID. Just how do you want to make that development so we can give you a specific answer; at which point do you want to make it and what is the height of your dam and what do you want to use it for, power or irrigation or regulation of flood control?

Mr. BORDEN. We want to put the dam in there and begin its development,
Mr. REID. For what purpose are you going to put it in?

Mr. BORDEN. Any useful development we can get in our State. We can : get the same possibly in a different manner than you people can, and we are willing to arbitrate those rights as far as they are concerned; but you have to start with something. You can't start all over the State of Arizona or Nevada and say “now some place up here we are going to put in a dam.". Now, what are the rights? We want to confiine it to a location which is in the Boulder Canyon, either at the upper end at the Boulder Canyon site or at the lower end where the Black Canyon site is. Put in something. Start with a dam and then begin to develop the use of the waters.

Mr. REID. You ask us to make you a definite, specific statement with reference to this development, and now I say on the part of the committee I think the committee can answer you just as definitely if you will give us definitely just what you want to do and how you want to do it. I don't think we could do that until we know just what you want the committee to do, whether you want the dam for a power dam, or whether you want the dam for a flood-control dam, or whether for storage of the normal flow, or a combinatin power dam, or what.

Mr. BORDEN. All four.
Mr. REID. Just how do you want to make that?

Mr. BORDEN. Any time you get water up above its normal flow so you can develop a head you can develop all four of them. Suppose it is only 10 feet

Mr. REID (interrupting). How do you want to do that and how do you want to divide that water stored there?

Senator SWING. Unless we get rid of the first question it is no use discussing the second one.

Mr. REID. If we are going to agree we are going to build a dam, we ought to know how it is going to be built.

Mr. Swing. The latter part is how it is going to be built, whether with cement or

Mr. REID (interrupting). No; I don't mean the type of construction. I mean whether it is going to be built for a power dam or whether it is going to be build for flood control or whether it is for a storage reservoir or whether it is going to be a combination dam to develop power and store those waters and how we are going to divide the water and the power.

Senator SWING. Well, the question is one of construction.
Mr. REID. Leave that out.

Senator SWING. Even the size of it is a matter for the Government; it isn't a matter for our determination, but whatever dam is constructed there should be constructed immediately and it should be constructed at or near this point. That is all we are concerned in.

Mr. REID. Would you be in favor of constructing a dam at Boulder Canyon which would be a power dam alone?

Senator SWING. That isn't a question for me to determine, That isn't a question which this delegation will have to determine.

Mr. REID. I mean would your delegation be in favor of that?

Senator SWING. That isn't a question that this delegation will have to determine.

Mr. REID. It seems to me you would have some influence in that.

Senator SWING. Whatever dam is constructed Nevada wants it constructed at once at that point at the earliest possible opportunity, and we agree on that.

Mr. REID. As I understand, Nevada has two points instead of one.
Mr. BORDEN. It is all the same.
Mr. REID. That is two dam sites you have in mind?

Mr. SQUIRES. It is all the same. Perhaps they have made examinations at three or four or half a dozen dlifferent sites in the same general canyon, in the same locality, with a view of getting the best foundation conditions and ascertaining where is the most feasible site. It is all the same thing.

Mr. REID. Why, Mr. Squires, you say you didn't, but the other gentleman there did state our answer wasn't specific enough. Just in what respect isn't our answer specific enough?

Mr. SQUIRES. It says you are ready to negotiate with regard to the construction of a dam at Boulder Canyon on some other site.

Mr. REID. We have stated we are ready to negotiate with regard to the construction of a dam on the river anywhere which might be beneficial to the parties interested. We don't care where the place is. If it is found it is most feasible there, I assume we would all be for it. I don't see any reason why we should not.

Mr. MADDOCK. May I ask this question, Mr. Swing? Suppose the engineers of the Government that are now engaged by the Government were not for Boulder Canyon as an initial development but for some other point, do you think in our acquiescence to withdrawing all objection, which we do not admit exists, we should also say we should do everything we can to overcome present governmental engineers' opinions of some other point? We are about in the same position as you would if we should ask you, California and Nevada, to withdraw all objections to Diamond Creek site and immediately you would feel up in the air, I presume.

Mr. SWING. No; I don't think we would be up in the air. We know exactly what we mean. I assume you know pretty well what this other subject means.

Mr. REID. We think we do and that is the reason we want to find out what he wants us to answer specifically.

Mr. FINNEY. May I make an inquiry here? Suppose you define a little more definitely the construction and the manner of building and the control.

Mr. REID. That is the point exactly.

Mr. FINNEY. Just supposing we say, and perhaps it may be agreeable to Nevada that you should favor the construction of a dam at or near Boulder Canyon, that is the way the engineers have expressed it, and that is a matter that we, you, nor I can determine in this negotiation, but the general location that you would be satisfied to support a dam at or near Boulder Canyon would confine 25,000,000 acrc-feet of water, which would be constructed by Government influence, owned and controlled by the Government. Would not that be a definite proposition ?

Mr. REID. It would be quite definite and I think the committee would be in favor of construction at Boulder Canyon, if after we work out the details

Mr. FINNEY. What details? Nevada has asked you simply to agree to that in principle, not as to how wide or thick the walls should be or just where the abutment should be placed, but just asking an agreement in principle.

Mr. REID. No; I think not, because an agreement in principle would involve an agreement in detail, because if we agree to go into an agreement to build a reservoir at Boulder Canyon we might be ready to do that provided we knew how the water was going to be distributed, and provided we knew how the power was going to be distributed and the control over that dam.

Mr. FINNEY. I suggest a Government control and that would suggest a manner of working out the division of the water, the allocation of the water, and the development of power and also the division of power.

Mr. REID. We could agree whether we wanted government control or whether we didn't want government control.

Mr. FINNEY. I have suggested what California really wanted with reference: to that when it undertook

Mr. Reid. Now, isn't it a fact that the thing that California is interested in in any construction on the river up there is flood control ; second, regulation of water supply; and third, division of such flood water as that dam may store; and fourth, the division of the power, or the allocation of the power as it might be developed. Aren't those the things that you are interested in?

Mr. FINNEY. Yes.
Mr. REID. Now the means that you arrive at that-

Mr. FINNEY (interrupting). The distribution of water would have to be controlled by a division of the water in the lower basin.

Mr. REID. That is all we ask you gentlemen to do, is to say specifically how you want that done and we will give you a definite answer.

Mr. FINNEY. That can't be done until we dispose of all other questions, like first claim upon the waterMr. REID (interrupting). That is the way we feel about it.

72578-2-PT 018

Mr. FINNEY. But they say you can't do it unless you are willing to agree, in principle at least, that there shall be a dam constructed at or near Boulder Canyon, something in the nature we have described.

Mr. MADDOCK. One point here: You made the statement the dam at Boulder Canyon of 25,000,000 acre-feet.

Mr. FINNEY. Yes sir. Mr. MADDOCK. As I remember it the copy I say of the California bill said 20,000,000.

Mr. FINNEY. Yes, it did. That was my bill,
Mr. MADDOCK. You have raised the figure five million.

Mr. FINNEY. Well, the height of the dam, we always concluded is 505 feet, I believe. I don't remember the exact amount that would be stored, actually 26,000,000 acre-feet, and if you allow for evaporation, and to allow for variation we named 20,000,000 acre-feet. That is the real basis claimed but we gave the specific million feet.

Mr. MADDOCK. I was just wondering about the increase and whether you weren't in close accord with your own legislature which said twenty million if I remember it.

Mr. REID. I Want to ask Mr. Squires one more question over there to try to clear up this Boulder Canyon thing. Mr. Squires, on the part of the Nevad& delegation, isn't it you thuoght that any development made in the canyon should, whether it is Boulder Canyon or Black Canyon, inure to the benefit of Nevada to such an extent as you would work out by an agreement with the other three states?

Mr. SQUIRES. Oh, yes, certainly.

Mr. Reid. Now, if you could not get a satisfactory agreement where you weren't going to get any advantages out of Boulder Canyon you would not be very much in favor of it would you ?

Mr. SQUIRES. I think we are in much the same position as California is in that respect. The question has been discussed in its various phases for five or six years and the best information seems to be that the way to utilize the river to the greatest advantage of the three southern states is for construction at Boulder Canyon.

Mr. REID. Well, you can all say that might be true. On the other hand if you arrive at any agreement as to the division of water and the power that that dam would develop

Mr. SQUIRES (interposing). We have not arrived at any agreement as to the division, but we have asked that as a preliminary to attempt to arrive at such an agreement that you concede, at least in principle, that that is the proper place for the construction, that that is a suitable place.

Mr. REID. Would not you insist on the part of Nevada that a satisfactory agreement to that effect be negotiated before you would enter into an agree ment to build a dam at Boulder Canyon.

Mr. SQUIRES. We would certainly insist that we should receive such protection and such benefits as we consider essential before we could enter into a final agreement.

Mr. REID. Just what are those ?

Mr. SQUIRES. Oh, I think that this matter is simply preliminary to the discussion of the other problems. If we can arrive now at an agreement similar to what Senator Swing read, why I think then we are in a position to go on and discuss the various details and phases of the division of those benefits.

Mr. REID. I think the Arizona Commission's position is very clear that we have no objection to a dam at Boulder Canyon or any other place, providing you can show us that that is the feasible place to put it.

Mr. SQUIRES. Of course we don't assume that any proposal you might make for a dam there would be the final and binding decision of this conference necessarily, if the details could not be worked out in a manner satisfactory to California, Arizona and Nevada

Mr. Reid. Your interests are just the same as ours in the Boulder Canyon, aren't they. You have half on your side and half on the Arizona side.

Mr. SQUIRES. Much the same.

Mr. REID. You would want those interests protected before you would enter into an agreement to allow anybody to build a dam?

Mr. SQUIRES. Certainly.

Mr. REID. All we want to find out is that is just what that is, and we may be with you one hundred per cent.

Mr. SQUIRES. Having assumed that that is a proper place to begin this development, then it seems we are on ground for discussion of these other details; but, it seems to me that first we should have a clear understanding, expressed in about the words of Senator Swing, that that is the general project.

Mr. REID. Could you assume this could you assume that you would very likely come to an agreement with all porties concerned if it developed that all those things could be taken care of, and which Arizona wants taken care of, and which I am pretty sure California wants taken care of, could ho worked out in detail, that then we might all agree on building a dam at Boulder Canyon?

Mr. SWING. I think that would be a violent assumption in view of your Governor's statement here.

Mr, MADDOCK. Just what was the Governor's statement about Boulder Can. yon? I have been looking for it, and I do not find it.

Mr. SWING. The entire tone of it.
Mr. MADDOCK. But what is the statement?
Mr. SWING. You have the statement.
Mr. MADDOCK. I can't find it. Will you point it out?
Mr. SWING. The only thing we want-
Mr. MADDOCK. If you make it plain, we will answer you.

Mr. Swing. If we enter into an agreement at all, if we come to an agreement, then that the agreement, when reduced to writing, shall contain a proviso in substance as I read a moment ago. If we don't enter into an agreement, we can throw it in the waste basket, Mr. REID. Why not work out these details and then do that?

Mr. SWING. We came here to do that, but when I heard this speech this morning

Mr. REID (interrupting). I want to state again on the part of the Committee of Arizona that we are ready and willing and anxious to go ahead with these genotiations, and work out a satisfactory agreement if one can be reached.

Mr. Swing. Perhaps you are. I am not questioning your sincerity at all.

Mr. REID. If you people are not willing to do that, we are sorry, but we can't help it.

Mr. SWING. If you will agree any agreement we enter into shall contain a provision, a stipulation in substance as I read, we can go ahead. Without such an agreement, I don't see the use of taking up the discussion of any other question at all.

Mr. REID. What do you mean? We will agree to what, now?
Mr. SWING. Do you want me to read it again?
Mr. REID. Yes; read it again.
Mr. SWING. Well, it is in substance
Mr. REID. Make it specific.

Mr. SWING. W I did. Enter into an agreement between the various representatives of Arizona, Nevada and California, here assembled, that any agreement entered into shall contain in substance a proviso that the State of Arizona shall immediately withdraw its opposition, if any it has, to the construction of a dam in the Colorado river at or near Boulder Canyon, and will urge the immediate development of such project in order that the said States and the people generally may utilize at the earliest possible moment the resources of this great river now being wasted.

Mr. REID. Well, I think, Mr. Swing, that you could very well add to that, and I think we could agree to it, that if any agreement is entered into, the objection to any particular development will be withdrawn upon the part of Arizona.

Mr. SWING. I don't think we want to ask that.

Mr. REID. I think our committee would be willing to make that agreement by adding that to it.

Mr. MCGREGOR. I would like to know if Mr. Swing is asking us to approve the Swing-Johnson Bill, as it is now?

Mr. SWING. I haven't asked any such thing; haven't even mentioned it.

Mr. MADDOCK. Well, you insisted vigorously upon our supporting Boulder Canyon. Supposing that the Government should go in at Mohave or Topock or Needles, whatever you call it, one place having three names.

« PreviousContinue »