it and who know their subject to sit down across the table and work out some comprehensive plan which they can all agree on, and then go to Congress and ask for some appropriation for flood protection. If there is any other appropriation made by Congress for this development, I think it should be made in the way of a loan to the different States which are interested and should be returned by them. The CHAIRMAN. Can you give us the provision or the subject, you have in mind that should be written into some bill?

Mr. READ. Well, I should think, Senator, it would be in sum and substance that if Arizona was allotted a division of this water and a division of the power in dam sites or reservoir sites which are partially in Arizona, which would be their equitable share, then to allow the State of Arizona at some time in the future to divert at highest points on the river any portion of that river which they might want to use in Arizona.

Senator KENDRICK. Would your plan to reserve for Arizona the right to her proportional amount of power necessarily involve the question of royalties on the other power used?

Mr. REID. Not necessarily. On a development which was partially within Arizona and partially within California the proportion allotted to Arizona would be for the benefit of Arizona, and California's apportionment to them--the same way with Nevada.

Senator KENDRICK. Then it would be your idea to reserve to Arizona the right to purchase all of the power for which she had a market, or, at least, her proportion of it?

Mr. REID. No; my idea would be, Senator, to have reserved to Arizona all of the power which would be allotted to the State under a joint development for her use and benefit, and to dispose of as she saw fit, whether in the markets of the Pacific coast or to such use as we might want to put it to in the State of Arizona. That would be our block of power and it could be disposed of as the State of Arizona saw fit for her benefit.

Senator KENDRICK. Using one hundred as a unit, what in your opinion, is the share of Arizona?

Mr. REID. In the power or water?

Senator KENDRICK. Power.

Mr. REID. Well, I would say that a fair apportionment of the power on a development which was 50 per cent in Arizona and 50 per cent in Nevada would be 50 per cent of the power.

Under some such arrangement as that we might be able to get together and work out our own problems on financing any portion of this development except that portion which the Government wanted to contribute to for flood control.

Senator KENDRICK. Mr. Reid, may I interrupt you?

Mr. REID. Yes, sir.

Senator KENDRICK. Do you have any information as to whether the plan has ever been proposed to California under which the two States might sit down in conference and try and reach an agreement as to the division of the waters?

Mr. REID. There has been no plan proposed, but there has been a proposal on the part of Arizona that they do that very thing.

The thing that we think has kept California and Nevada from entering into those negotiations before was the idea of the Swing

Johnson bill, that it was going to pass and that they were going to get all these benefits without taking Arizona into consideration. I think if that feature was eliminated and they knew that the SwingJohnson bill was not going to pass we would not have any trouble in working out an agreement with California and Nevada. That is my opinion.

Senator KENDRICK. Assuming then that it was proposed to proceed with the Swing-Johnson bill

Mr. REID. Yes.

Senator KENDRICK. Is it your opinion that the people of Arizona would be agreeable to that plan in case a previous arrangement was entered into as to a division of this water and other conditions that you have named?

Mr. REID. I think it would be very acceptable to the State of Arizona if some such provision as that could be written in the bill wherein the State of Arizona's rights could be protected now and in the future.

Senator JOHNSON. If the dam were erected in the State of Arizona is it your view that all the power should be allotted to Arizona? Mr. REID. Senator, I feel that all the power which is wholly within Arizona and can be developed in Arizona should belong to Arizona. Let us work it out ourselves.

Senator JOHNSON. I am fully in accord with you in trying to work this thing out, but I wanted to get your viewpoint for the record, if I may. But if a dam were erected in Arizona your viewpoint is that all the power should be allotted to Arizona, is it not? Mr. REID. Yes, sir; and I think Arizona should pay the bill and then sell the power on the market where we can find it.

The CHAIRMAN. You mean now, that Arizona should advance the money to construct the dam to furnish the power?

Mr. REID. Senator, we don't need to put up one dollar. We can finance this whole thing on California's needs. They have got to have the water and they have got to have the power.

Senator JOHNSON. I am very much obliged to you, Mr. Reid, for making a perfectly frank statement, and we are beginning to understand-I certainly better than I have understood before-the situation.

Mr.. REID. As I see it, if I might explain to the committee, the needs of California for a domestic water supply to supplement their irrigation supply on the coast is so great that they have got to make

some move.

Now it isn't a prohibitive development. The costs are entirely feasible and away below the costs of other municipal supplies on the Pacific coast. Oakland's water supply, for instance, cost about ten times what the proposed supply for Los Angeles will cost.

Senator JOHNSON. The method would be that California would supply the capital to build the dam, supply all the money, and all the power would be allotted to Arizona?

Mr. REID. Not necessarily. If California was interested in this dam site her proportion of the power would be left to her. If Nevada was interested it could be left to Nevada. and could be disposed of to California at a price which would give them cheap power.

Senator JOHNSON. That is, you are now speaking of locations? Mr. REID. I am speaking of development.

Senator JOHNSON. But given your development, the power in its allotment would follow the location of the particular works? Mr. REID. Yes.

Senator KENDRICK. Well, Mr. Reid, assuming that the Boulder Canyon Dam site were selected; that, I believe, is in the State of Nevada, is it not?

Mr. REID. Yes, sir.

Senator KENDRICK. In the event the dam was built at Government expense, you would not contend that Arizona should participate in the ownership of the power, would you?

Mr. REID. Well, Senator, I don't assume that the Government is going to make any appropriation to the benefit of the State of Arizona and the State of Nevada which they are not going to ask us to pay back with interest. Now, whether we borrow this money from the Government or whether we go out in outside sources and borrow it, as long as we pay it back we feel like we had some ownership in there.

Senator KENDRICK. Well, supposing that the Government did build the dam in the interest of flood control, and it happened that the dam site was located in the State of Nevada, then in that event your State of Arizona would only be interested in a division of the waters and not of the power?

Mr. REID. And the power. We feel like that power is one of our natural resources, Senator, and we should avail ourselves of it in the future.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Reid. I understand that if the Government should advance the money for the construction of a dam at Boulder Canyon, which is between Arizona and Nevada, I understandMr. REID. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That Arizona would be entitled to 50 per cent of the power and Nevada 50 per cent of the power.

Mr. REID. Well, Nevada and California might divide it to suit themselves. If we had our 50 per cent, we would not object to how they divided theirs.

The CHAIRMAN. Hasn't California any rights under your theory? Mr. REID. Not in that dam site.

The CHAIRMAN. If the Government builds the dam, advances the morey, and half of it rests against the banks of Nevada and half of it rests against the banks of Arizona, is it your contention that Arizona would have 50 per cent of the power that is developed and Nevada 50 per cent?

Mr. REID. I think that would be the logical conclusion, as the ownership is 50 per cent in each of those States.

Senator KENDRICK. But in that event, as I understand you, you contend that Arizona should be required to pay one-half of the cost of the dam?

Mr. REID. That depending. Senator. I think the cost of that structure should be based on the benefits received.

Now, California is going to get a great deal of benefit out of any structure that is built in that river. It is going to get flood protection and it is going to get regulated water supply for some 600,000

acres of land. It is going to get a water supply of some 200,000 second-feet for its cities and its coastal countries. California is going to secure a great many benefits out of it and certainly should be assessed some of the construction costs. I think the construction costs should be divided in proportion to the benefits received.

Senator KENDRICK. Well, supposing the dam after completion belonged equally to Arizona and to Nevada, and the Government expended the money and required each of those two States to return the amount invested?

Mr. REID. Then they should be entitled to all the power.

Senator KENDRICK. Then would you not consider that the State of California met all of the requirements by paying for the privi lege that she enjoyed in the way of a certain ratio or proportion of the power?

Mr. REID. That is what I said about working out an agreement. Senator. I think an agreement could be very easily worked out with California. We think that if this Swing-Johnson bill was out of the way these two States would get together.

Senator KENDRICK. Nevada and Arizona would simply, according to that agreement, sell to California, as any other company, the power she used?

Mr. REID. Exactly.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Also the water, too; California would have to pay you for the water?

Mr. REID. No; the State of California has appropriated about 100,000 second-feet of the Colorado River right now, and they are putting practically all of it to beneficial use, the normal flow of the river at present. I don't think that anybody expects to disturb those water rights which California has enjoyed.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. What would we have to do for any additional water?

Mr. REID. I should think you would have to pay your proportion for any additional water developed which you use for your benefit. Senator SHORTRIDGE. Pay to whom?

Mr. REID. Pay to the fund-to the Government, if it built it. or whoever put up the money, or a joint development where each contributed their proportionate part.

Senator JOHNSON. Just for my own information, is the view you express generally the view of your people?

Mr. REID. I don't know as to the view of the people. I have been working on this thing for some time and have given it a great deal of thought and study, and it seems to be the general feeling that the costs should be assessed according to the benefits, and that the benefits should be divided in accordance with the location of these dam sites. I think that generally is the sentiment here.

Now as to the details, they haven't gotten down to details, as to where they are going to build the dam or how they are going to divert this water. That is a question that can be settled after they get some place to start from. They should have some agreement. If they got an agreement which would be satisfactory to those three States, why, then we have got some place to start from to locate the dam.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Mr. Reid, do you think that in an act providing for the building of a dam, say at Boulder Canyon, a proviso

could be inserted protecting the after-acquired rights of all the upper States?

Mr. REID. The after-acquired rights?

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Yes; by usage.

Mr. REID. I think that all the State should be protected in their rights to those waters which flow in their States.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. You probably don't grasp the full meaning of my question.

Mr. REID. I didn't get the "after acquired" part of it.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Could it be provided in the act itself that the rights of all the States above the dam, the rights of all of the upper-basin States, rights by them hereafter to be exercised, say, 100 or 50, or 20 years hereafter, or rights to be acquired by usage-could these present or after acquired rights be reserved to the upper-basin States, so that people taking or acquiring rights as of now, or upon the completion of the dam, would take those rights subject to the reserved rights of the upper States?

Mr. REID. I think the only way in the world you could finance a project like that, Senator, would be for the Government to put up all the money and give the lower-basin States all the profits. You could not finance it any other way and predicate it on a theory of that kind. Senator SHORTRIDGE. Very well. I don't wish to pursue the matter further.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Reid, very much. Is Mr. Frank Trott present?

STATEMENT OF FRANK P. TROTT, STATE WATER COMMISSIONER, STATE OF ARIZONA, PHOENIX

Mr. TROTT. I am at present State water commissioner and have held that office about four months. I am an engineer by profession, having practiced my profession off and on for 42 years. I am a registered civil engineer and president of the Arizona division of the American Society of Engineers.

What I wanted to say to you gentlemen can be briefly said. Mr. La Rue has included in his report a map of the Parker-Gila project. That map shows the diversion of the water at a dam that is proposed to be built 514 miles above Parker.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. What county?

Mr. TROTT. That is in Yuma County.

Senator SHORTRIDGE. Five and a quarter miles above what?

The CHAIRMAN. Above Parker.

Mr. TROTT. It is in the county of Yuma. I believe it is in Yuma County.

The CHAIRMAN. Yes, sir; it is in Yuma County.

Mr. TROTT. And the dam site has been filed on by three different parties. The State of Arizona, through its board of directors, has filed upon that dam site both for power and for irrigation. I do not wish to enter into a discussion of this proposition, but I simply desire to give you some data relating to that and to some other

matters.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, the Parker-Gila project, is that involved in the development of the Colorado River?

Mr. TROTT. It follows this. An appropriation was made at the last session of the legislature that the State of Arizona would expend