Page images
PDF
EPUB

Mr. RAKER. Well, the suggestion that the Government would be in that attitude legally has been made-and there is not much doubt about it but what I was asking was: If that was not your opinion, but still you were willing to go on and advise the committee that, notwithstanding that legal situation as to the rights of the Governmentand the States, there is an ample amount of water to supply all the wants for agricultural and domestic purposes below, as well as the continued flow for development of electrical energy, with a dam constructed either at Boulder Canyon or Black Canyon?

Secretary HOOVER. That certainly is true. This provision was put in the compact simply as against the possibility of a complete development of the 6,000,000 horse power on the river. This dam would produce about 800,000 and would have power priorities.

The Colorado River presents an opportunity for two great storage points: One in the lower canyon; and one in the upped canyon. It offers an opportunity for a continuous series of dams between those great storage dams, and further dams below even Boulder Canyon, chiefly for power purposes. If you had a great row of power plants of that character running, perhaps 30 of them, the time might arrive, perhaps 200 or 300 years hence, when, in order to protect the maximum agricultural development that could occur, it would be nececssary to check power use in some part of the season-a season of minimum flow, or a time of an arid year, or something of that kind; for some portion of the year. I can not conceieve that even the most imaginative case could affect it for more than a short season of the year, and at least this initial dam would have prior rights over the others. But it would surely be a great social crime to have the sudden destruction of all those farms, or the ruin of a large portion of them, in order to keep a row of dynamos running, up and down the river.

In other words, at some time, if it is necessary to shut down onehalf of those dynamos for a month, that should be done because the ruin to agriculture would be complete and the loss of property would be enormous if it had to be abandoned for a time.

Mr. RAKER. Yes. But what I am getting at is this: If it should occur that the Government should spend $100.000,000 for a dam and install a plant for generating and distributing systems, Congress ought to know, and the public ought to know, that its money will be spent in such a way that it will be secured; that there is no chance of destroying the plant by the people above holding back the water. Secretary HOOVER. The real problem from a power point of view and all other points of view is storage. This river varies from 250,000 second-feet in flood to 7,500 second-feet at low water. It varies from 9,000.000 acre-feet per annum to 25,000,000 acre-feet. Anything that makes storage or contributes to it creates power. Under this compact the upper basin can not consume more than 7,500,000 acre-feet per annum: they can not even hold back that much, unless they are applying it to agriculture. If they do consume it in agriculture, they will automatically create a natural storage of the flood flow, which will equate itself to average the minimum flow at any dam which it is proposed the Government shall build. The problem is by various forms of storage or delayed use of the flood flow to average the minimum flow. An even flow of 8,500,000

acre-feet over this dam will give all the power that is required to warrant this construction. Moreover, the retention of 7,500,000 feet above allows more than 8,500,000 feet below, because the average flow is more than 16,000,000 feet.

The building of the other power plants on the upper river would also have the effect of equating the flow. Everything that is done on the river above will equate the flow at the Boulder Dam. I can not conceive any situation in which that dam (having a certain priority right in power) would ever be in danger of not having enough water for its power production.

Mr. HAYDEN. With reference to property rights, I notice this in a brief filed with the Federal Power Commission:

The inescapable result of the ratification of the Colorado River compact would be to give to Mexico water enough to reclaim 2,000,000 acres of land, and limit the area reclaimable in Arizona from the Colorado River to 280,000 acres, and in California to 940,000 acres.

I would like to have you discuss the Mexican rights, and the possibilities of irrigation in Mexico, and the Mexican situation as you know it.

Secretary HOOVER. That is surely the most demagogic stuff ever put into print. There is no right given to Mexico under this compact. I have read you that provision of the compact. It provides if the United States Government should subsequently agree with Mexico as to the rights of Mexico, then the distribution of that burden is designated, and nothing else. The object of the compact is to settle the legal difficulties between the upper and lower basin States. The very moment that we have created storage of the waters of the river, we have placed our people in the situation where they can use that water more extensively; and it thus diminishes the flow to Mexico.

What rights Mexico may have in this matter, as a matter of justice and international equity, I do not know; and nobody else can know until a negotiation has been carried out. But there is nothing in this compact that bears any relationship to that problem; and the very conception of the compact will minimize that question because it itself demonstrates the rights of our States.

Mr. HAYDEN. The argument as I have heard it, is that, if the flow of the Colorado River is regulated; and if the States of the upper basin and the lower basin are permitted to use only the amounts allocated to them, which is 16,000,000 acre-feet, the surplus water unappropriated would be available for Mexico; that it would be stored and gradually let out of these dams for power purposes; so that, the water would run into Mexico and the Mexicans could make beneficial use of it; and that thereby Americans in the United States will be estopped from using it.

Secretary HOOVER. There is nothing in the compact that estops any State from using any excess above 16.000.000 feet of water if it wants to. The only point is that the distribution of the reserve water is not determined until the respective needs of the different States are better known. There is nothing in the compact that indicates that this unappropriated water shall run free forever, quite to the contrary it contemplates its diversion among the States at a later date.

Mr. HAYDEN. Would it not allay the fears that some people have, and would it not place us in a better position in dealing with Mexico, if in the legislation authorizing the construction of a great dam to control the entire flow of the Colorado River there was included a declaration to the effect that, having stored the water in the United States at our own expense, we reserved the right to use it whenever needed?

Secretary HOOVER. I should say that that would be the proper thing to do. I would say this as to the Mexican rights which have a bearing on this question: No one can tell what the rights of Mexico will be until we have examined into that. But Mexico's rights surely only apply to the natural flow of the river. They can claim no rights by virtue of our expenditure in storage. Whatever rights they have are to some portion of the natural flow at the minimum and at the flood. Rights in the flood are not material, on the contrary we have a right to claim something for preventing it. Their rights for a participation in the natural minimum must be based upon an equalization with the whole basin. Here is a certain amount of land in the United States that can have water applied to it for beneficial use; and there is a certain amount of land in Mexico; and there is a certain ratio between them. Flood water is of no use for these purposes. The neck of the bottle in irrigation is the minimum flow. Mexico's useful rights are limited to her ratio proportion of the natural minimum flow of the river; and the natural minimum flow of the river is about 7,500 second-feet, or thereabouts. If Mexico could store water they might have use for the flood; physically they have no storage possibilities; obviously they can not ask us to undertake it. Without such storage in Mexico all this right to irrigation of 2,000,000 acres out of water stored at the expense of the United States is a brain storm.

Mr. HAYDEN. You spoke of the objection on the part of the States of the upper basin to the acquirement of any right in the lower basin without there being first some understanding with them. From that I gathered that you thought it was improbable that their support could be expected for legislation in Congress, or their influence outside of Congress, at this time. Do I understand that, in your opinion, it will be necessary that some determination be made of the Colorado River compact before anything is accomplished?

Secretary HOOVER. Well, of course, I can not speak for what action the upper States may take their legislatures or their representatives. I only know the feeling that exists in the upper States; and the multitude of expressions made by their commissioners in these negotiations; and the fact that the upper States have systematically opposed a definite development of the lower basin until their rights were recognized. Now, whether or not a device might be found here that would protect and satisfy them and incorporated in this legislation, I do not know.

Mr. HAYDEN. If it were a fact that nothing could be accomplished until the Colorado River compact is approved, can you suggest anything that could be done in the meantime that would expedite development on the river?

Secretary HOOVER. Well, I am sure I am rather at a loss how to answer that question. I have the feeling that, of course, here is a problem of extreme emergency. People are in serious danger of

losing their lives and their homes, both in Arizona and in California. The ratifying of the compact is so obviously a common sense and an equitable step and would have led to the expedition of this whole matter.

I do not know what alternative arrangement could be gotten through Congress with the consent of the upper States. I had hoped the compact would have been ratified long before this.

Mr. HAYDEN. In the State of Arizona many people believe that the greatest benefit that is to come to the State is from the development of cheap power. It is said that if the water of the river, which must be stored for irrigation and for flood protection, were stored above the Grand Canyon region, there would be more hydroelectric power developed in the State of Arizona, because the great drop in the river is through the Grand Canyon section. I would like to get your view as to whether it might not be just as well to locate the great storage reservoir above the Grand Canyon as below it?

Secretary HOOVER. The argument in favor of the lower storage as against the upper storage is, to a very large degree, an economic argument. That the upper storage is some 150 to 200 miles-I forget just what-farther removed from the market for power; and that it is beyond an economic transmission distance. If the upper reservoir were built for purposes of storage and river control, there would be no market for the power for a long time to come. I think every engineer would say that if you are going to develop a river systematically, on a theoretical basis, you probably would begin to build the first dam at the top, in order to equate the water for the benefit of dams built below.

But it will surely be many years before there will be a demand for 800.000 horsepower from such a dam in the upper canyon. The Federal Government, in entering upon an enormous expenditure at that point, would have to dismiss from its mind any idea of very large immediate power revenues. Whereas, by constructing the lower dam first, there is and would be from the time the dam was completed, a probably complete market for the power.

That is the principal argument. There are other secondary arguments in favor of the lower development first.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Would that argument apply to a dam at Flaming Gorge?

Secretary HOOVER. No; a development at Flaming Gorge would be for the purpose of supplying power into Utah and Colorado and save irrigation.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. As a matter of fact, I am informed that for the entire power that could be produced there, there is a market right

now.

Secretary HOOVER. I understand there is a large market in the upper basin States, but this power could never be transmitted to the lower basin to any advantage, and such a dam would not control the flood flow of the river and thus not give protection to the lower valleys.

Mr. LEATHERWOOD. Now, the upper basin States having primarily ratified the compact, and done all in their power to join in the common development of this river, should they at this time be subjected to having to forego protection under the compact and permitting

the development to go ahead blindly, without knowing what their rights are or will be?

Secretary HOOVER. As chairman of the Colorado River Commission, and being anxious to get this problem settled, I have tried to keep out of interstate disputes as much as possible, and to act as a neutral person promoting the settlement. I would say this: That I think the upper States have a just claim for full protection to the more delayed development of their agriculture; and that whether this compact is adopted, or whether some modification is adopted, or whether some other device can be found, as a matter of justice that protection must be provided for them and their future before this construction proceeds. Some people believe that a method might be found in this legislation.

Mr. RAKER. Right in that connection, Mr. Secretary, if this compact is adopted, how and through what method or through what means would the Federal Government get control or have control of the water at Boulder Canyon Dam, so that it will know that it will have a specific flow for irrigation and a specific flow for hydroelectric energy?

Secretary HOOVER. The Federal Government will know that the moment it consults the physical situation on the river. The Boulder Canyon Dam, I think, will store twenty-six to twenty-eight million. acre-feet. I do not know the exact amount.

Mr. DAVIS. I think it is 34,000,000 acre-feet.

Secretary HooVER. Well, that 34,000,000 acre-feet will be accumulated out of the flood flow of the river. The development of irrigable lands in the upper basin will equate the flow over the summer time: and other factors in development will assure a regular flow of water from that dam. The practical situation is such that there need be no anxiety as to that question.

Mr. LITTLE. Mr. Secretary, will you permit a question? As I understand, the commission believes that it would have been better to begin at the top and work down?

Secretary HOOVER. The commission did not enter into the engineering problems.

Mr. LITTLE. But the necessities of the lower valleys are such as to make it necessary to begin at the lower end. Is that one of the problems that you had in mind?

Secretary HOOVER. The flood flow can be controlled from the upper dam just as well as from the lower dam; but there is not the ap-. preciable power demand or market from the upper canyon site that there is from the lower site.

Mr. HAYDEN. Having started this discussion, I would like to have it finished.

Secretary HOOVER. I would not wish to be interpreted as saying no power could be sold from the upper dam; but I will say that there is nothing like the immediate market for power from the upper site that there is from the lower one.

Some question has been raised as to the foundations and the engineering difficulties of dam construction at the upper site. Engineering officers of the Reclamation Service and the Geological Survey. I think, would give you details of these questions.

Mr. LITTLE. Well, which is better, to take care of the necessities for the present day, or figure for 300 years from now?

« PreviousContinue »