l . COLORADO RIVER WATER USERS ASSOCIATION '

.. 1 • ' • '

--...... • • \ MC)(l(.0 \

PROCEEDINGS

OF THE NINTH ANNUAL CONFERENCE,

COLORADO RIVER WATER USERS ASSOCIATION l LAS VEGAS, NEVADA

DECEMBER 8 to 9, 1952 l'CI.CPHO,..C MADl•OM G•IGIG EXT. 615

OALLAS E. COLE

S-urcRVISING HYOIIAV0..1~ ElCALIFORNIA COLORADO RIVER WATER USERS ASSOCIATION

PURPOSES OF ASSOCIATION

(Reprinted from Secticm S of Constitutwn)

This association is organized to protect and safeguard the interests of the users of the Colorado River stream system, to contact State and Federal agencies on matters of material or vital importance to the membership of the association, to formulate and promote passage of legislation for the benefit and welfare of the water users, to study and to advise upon proposed irrigation, power and land development ptoj­ ects, to plan ways and means of bringing about the construction of approved projects designed to beneficially use the waters of the Colo­ rado River system, and safeguard State contracts with the Government for water and power upon which the welfare of water users depends. This association shall not be affiliated with any political organization or political party and shall at all times avoid political influence designed to secure advantages for any State or area at the expense of or disadvantage of other States or areas. It shall be understood that the initial organization meeting represented approximately 2,000,000 water users and 77 percent of the total water of the Colorado River system. It shall be a purpose of the association to increase its mem­ bership to include all water users in the Colorado River Basin. The association shalJ cooperate with State and Federal agencies in ' planning the appropriate development and use of the water resources of the Colorado River Basin with equity towards all users and interests. It shall be the duty of the association to take prompt and vigorous action to protect infringement upon the water rights and resources of the water users by political agencies making pleas of national expediency. The association may cooperate with and support the purposes and objectives of organizations having the approval of the officers and directors, whether they are on a State-wide, regional, or national basis. The association shall avoid, as far as possible, being influenced by State or Federal agencies on the grounds of expediency, but shall be guided in its work and purposes by the needs of the actual users of the waters of the Colorado River system within the United States. COLORADO RIVER WATER USERS ASSOCIATION

PURPOSES OF ASSOCIATION

(Reprinted from Section 3 of Constitution)

This association is organized to protect and safeguard the interests of the users of the Colorado River stream system, to contact State and Federal agencies on matters of material or vital importance to the membership of the association, to formulate and promote passage of legislation for the benefit and welfare of the water users, to study and to advise upon proposed irrigation, power and land development proj­ ects, to plan ways and means of bringing about the construction of approved projects designed to beneficially use the waters of the Colo­ rado River system, and safeguard State contracts with the Government for water and power upon which the welfare of water users depends. This association shall not be affiliated with any political organization or political party and shall at all times avoid political influence de.~igoed to secure advantages for any State or area at the expense of or disadvantage of other States or areas. It shall be understood that the initial organization meeting represented approximately 2,000,000 water users and 77 percent of the total water of the Colorado River system. It shall be a purpose of the association to increase its mem­ bership to include all water users in the Colorado River Basin. The association shall cooperate with State and Federal agencies in ' planning the appropriate development and use of the water resources of the Colorado River Basin with equity towards all users and interests. It shall be the duty of the association to take prompt and vigorous action to protect infringement upon the water rights and resources of the water users by political agencies making pleas of national expediency. The association may cooperate with and support the purposes and objectives of organizations having the approval of the officers and directors, whether they are on a State-wide, regional, or national basis. The association shall avoid, as far as possible, being inftuenced by State or Federal agencies on the grounds of expediency, but shall be guided in its work and purposes by the needs of the actual users of the waters of the Colorado River system within the United States. The ninth annual conference of the Colorado River Water Users Association was called to order by President A. J . Shaver at the Thunderbird Hotel, Las Vegas, Nevada at 9:45 A.M., December 8, 1952. Addresses of welccme were given by the Honorable C. D. Baker, Mayor of Las Vegas, and the Honorable Cliff Jones, Lieutenant Governor of Nevada.

The following c0llllll1ttees were appointed by the President: Auditing -- Hampton c. Godbe (Chairman), R. J, McMullin, and Leo A, Snow

Resolutions Arvin B, Shaw, Jr. (Chairman), c. A. Anderson, and AJ.fied Merritt Smith Nominating Victor r. Corbell, Hugh A. Shamberger, and Fisher Harris Addresses delivered at the conference are summarized herewith: *********** RECENT AC':I'IVITIES OF DEPARrMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Warren T. },furphy - Field Representative

The Department of Agriculture plays a vital role in many fields of interest to users of the waters of the Colorado River. Concerned with the cropland phases are the Soil Conservation Service, the Production and Marketing Administration, the Agricultural Extension Service, the Farmers Heme Adminis­ tration, the Agricultural Research Administration, the state Agricultural Experiment stations and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. The U.S. Forest Service and the cooperating State Forestry Departments are pre-eminent ·in the field of protecting, managing and conducting research relating to the wild watershed lands of the Pacific Southwest. Under the Soi l Conservation Service, a cooperative drainage study has been under way about one year near Grand Junction, Colorado to determine the possibility of reclaiming lands that have deteriorated or gone out of produc­ tion due to water logging and the accumulation of salts. The possibility of reducing the upward pressure of water into tight soils from underground aquifers by means of wells is being studied, The SCS is also undertaking studies of water­ shed yield and sediment production from grasslands in Arizona and New Mexico.

This year, the summary of soil and water research needs in the irrigated West developed by the National Reclamation Association Committees on Research was released as Senate Document 98, providing in one place a,review of our most urgent research needs. Research units of the USDA assisted NRA in surveying needs and developing the program presented,

-1- USDA agencies have collaborated with other Federal and State groups in seeking economically feasible means of controlling salt cedar. Early this year an overall program embracing all USDA agency needs to carry on an effective research program was presented to our budget officials.

USDA and the Bureau of Reclamation have collaborated to include with­ in the 1954 budget estimates of the Bureau of Reclamation funds for a more effective soil and water research program on irrigated lands.

At the U.S. Salinity Laboratory, a major 1952 project bas been complete revision and bringing up to date of the 1947 Manual on Salinity and Alkali Soil Diagnosis and Treatment. At Brawley, California, the new Southwestern Irriga­ tion Research Station of the BPISAE added to its staff this year and is getting research under way.

The U.S. Forest Service is going ahead with long-term studies aimed at determining the effects of forest harvesting and management on water yield and sediment production on headwaters of the Colorado River near Fraser. Work with small plots indicates that water yield can be increased 15 percent by proper forest cutting methods. The small plot work is being extended to a whole watershed. At the Sierra Ancha Station in Arizona on the upper Salt River watershed, the Workman Creek Unit is ready for initial timber cutting operations. The flow from this area has been carefully studied over a period of years in its natural state. The effect of timber cutting on water yield and sediment production will now be measured.

The Department was given Congressional authority to prepare a coordi­ nated long-range program of agricultural resource development in the Colorado Basin to complement engineering development plans proposed by the Bureau of Reclamation. The authorization was not accompanied by allocation of funds, however, so it has been impossible to inaugurate the program.

A special project to restore flood damaged farm and ranch lands in Utah was authorized under Public Law 371 approved by the President June 4, 1952. The Soil Conservation Service and the Production and Marketing Administration are handling the work. Approximately 2-1/4 million dollars bas been granted for the repair of damage in Utah by 1952 floods, largely to irrigation facilities .

Upstream flood prevention survey work by the Forest Service and the SCS has been substantially reduced this year in the Pacific Southwest. Con­ gressional action r educed the funds available by nearly $271,000 or 70 percent below the amount available last year.

The SCS continues to develop conservation farm plans in cooperation with local State-organized Soil Conservation Districts, and is providing technical supervision of permanent works installed under the PMA program. PMA is carrying on an intensive program aimed at insuring on individual farms the maximum permanent conservation results with the available funds. Good results are being obtained under agreements whereby the farmers pool their conservation payments in financing substantial improvements. An outstanding example is the recently completed 4-1/2 mile dike to protect the main canal of the Maricopa County Water Conservation District Number 1 in Arizona from flood damage. Ninety-five landowners participated and the Agricultural Conservation Program payment of $30,000 was a real aid.

-2- In the small water facility program of the Farmers Home Administration, several loans at or near the maximum of $100,000 are approved or under consid­ eration in the Southwest. Interest is being shown i n t he impr ovement of culinary water for rural settlements. In Utah, loans in excess of $15,000 each have been made on 11 projects now under way or recently completed. In final stages of appr oval is a loan of $100,000 to the New Escalante Irrigation Company in Utah.

In spite of a fire season characterized by a late fall drought, less than 4,ooo acres of National Forest Lands in Colorado River watersheds were burned over this year. The pr ogram of r eseeding r anges to grass is popular with catt lemen. To some, the rate of progress seems slow, but the rate is entirely dependent upon the funds available and these are not large. Last summer, more than 200 men were engaged in the vi gorous campaign to stem the outbr eak of Engelman Spruce beetle centered at the head of the Colorado River. The loss of timber from the beetle attack has exceeded a billion board feet of spruce, but the outbreak now appears to be decli ning.

We may expect plans and programs devised under the outgoing administra­ tion to be carefully scrutinized by the new. I am certai n, however, that pr incipl es of wise resource conservation coupled With intelligent development and use of resources transcend partisan considerations. Therefore, I expect the land and water resource conservati on activities whi ch have been part of the work of the Department since the Eighteen Nineties to continue. The future of agriculture and of the Nation is too closely tied in with the manner in which soil and water resources a.re utilized for any let-down 1n interest and action.

It has been a pleasure to be with you and give you this brief account of USDA activities. We welcome any suggestions as to how we can better serve you, the wat er user s in the Colorado and adjacent basins. * * ******** * ACTIVITIES OF THE CORPS OF ENGINEERS

Lt. Col. Irvin M, Rice, Los Angeles District

I am delighted to have the opportunity to meet you and become acquainted wi th your needs and problems. Colonel Shuler asked me to express his regrets that the urgent military program prevents his attendance at this meeting.

The deep sense of urgency that was quickening the pace of mobilizing materials and men a year ago continues. National-defense r equirements sharply curtail normal activities on public works and private enterprise. I n accordance with the President's directive of 1950, the Corps of Engineer s continues to screen its pr ogram t o defer or curtail projects t hat do not directly contribute to the defense effort. Most of the Los Angeles District' s engineering and technical personnel are stil l engaged in designing and con­ structiijg research and military facilities for the Army and Air Force.

-3- Last year we emphasized that five author i zed projects in the Colorado River Basin were in i nact ive status, as a result of the President's directive. This is still true of three of those projects: Alamo Reservoir on Bill Wi lliams River; Whitlow Ranch Reser voi r on Queen Creek; and Mathews Canyon and Pine Canyon Flood Control Basins on tributaries of Meadow Valley Wash, Nevada. Senator Malone of Nevada, at a Public Works Subcommittee heari ng, expressed Nevada's interest in early const ruction of Mathews and Pine Canyon Dams. As a result, the District has recommended that this project be reconsidered to determine its status in relation to the President's program. As yet we have had no decision from higher aut hority.

Preliminary planning work has started on Painted Rock Flood Control Basin on Gila River - one Of the project s r eported as inactive last year. This unit in the flood-control plan for lower Colorado River is important not only to the United States but to Mexico.

Now for the fifth project reported inactive last year - the Tucson diversion channel. Local people have decided to construct their own project.

Last year, a review of the Federal project indicated that it qualified for construction in the interests of national defense - floods in the area seriously menaced defense installations! Meantime, however, development in areas needed for rights-of-way was taking place rapidly. This meant higher costs to local interests for acquiring rights-of-way and relocating highways and utilities. In addition, real-estate i nterests were exerting pressure for an im­ provement that would least interfere with their plans for subdivisions. Funds were made available for the diversion channel in the Flood Control Appropriations Bill for fiscal 1953 - and local people were so advised. However, the Pima County Supervisors decided to go ahead with the County's project. Although the Board members wer e aware that the County plan provided less protection than the Federal plan, they felt that it more nearly met the desires of local interests. The local project has been started, and funds for the Federal project revoked.

We still have a large backlog of authorized Colorado River Basin investigations: A preliminary examination on Colorado River and Tributaries above Lee Ferry; a review on Little Colorado River in the vicinity of Gallup; surveys on Gila River and tributaries, Kanab Creek, and Virgin River and tributaries; and interim surveys on Gila River in Safford Valley, Animas River, and the Dolores River Basin at and upstream from Dolores. In addition, two new investigat ions have been authorized: An interim survey on lower Agua Fria River and vicinity, Arizona; and a preliminary examina­ tion on Las Vegas Wash, Nevada.

Our efforts have been mostly confined to a report on the lower Agua Fria River, where the flood problem demanded immediate action if military installa­ tions, defense plants and agricultural land were t o be protected. Last year alone, damage from floods totaled more than $3,000,000 . We hope to have our report ready for Congress early in the next session. Tentative plans, which would provide complete protection to most of the area, include a detention basin and an outlet channel, to intercept flows from Trilby Wash and adjacent areas, and carry them into lower Agua Fria River. Total first cost is estimated at $3,114,ooo - about the same as the damage that occurred last year alone!

-4- A1though the Virgin River Basin survey is in inactive status, one of the problems that held up our work has been settled - whether a multiple-purpose structure for flood control and water conservation at the White Narrows site could be justified. The Bureau of Reclamation has completed studies of a reservoir for water conservation and sediment. To prevent overlapping, we made only preliminary analyses of flood-control features. We have reviewed the Bureau's report, which indicates that a reservoir for water conservation and sediment is infeasible at this time. Because flood-control benefits would have only minor effect, we agree that a multiple-purpose structure at the White Narrowe site is not justified.

It is possible that the only justi fied flood-control project in the Virgin River Basin is the presently authorized construction of Mathews and Pine Canyon Dams. However, the Bureau's studies of water conservation in the upper Virgin River Basin may indicate the need for further flood-control inves­ tigations in connection with multiple-purpose structures.

The Los Angeles District had its share of emergency work last spring, when melting snows brought disaster or threats to many communities in the upper Colorado River Basin. In response to urgent appeals we rushed flood-fighting teams to Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. Their efforts were successful. No lives were lost, and major damage was prevented. Emergency work, which included strengthening, raising, and extending existing levees, building new levees, channel-rectification, clean-out, and demolition, was done at Baggs, Wyoming; Dolores and Rico, Colorado; and Duchesne, Utah. We made a field reconnaissance of areas in eastern Utah that were seriously affected by floods, and prepared informal reports that should be of value in solving future flood-control problems.

Only when the international situation clears will we be able to report substantial progress in the Colorado River Basin. However, we have made some progress and still have a large backlog of authorized flood-control investigations. If and when the international situation permits the Congress to concentrate on the peacetime needs of the country, we will again be able t o bend all our energies toward the successful completion of a farsighted program to insure the maximtnn use and control of water. *********** RECENT DEVELOPMENTS IN WATER INVEsrIGATION ACTIVITIES OF U, S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY IN COLORADO RIVER BASm

Carl G. Paulsen, Chief Hydraulic Engineer

The water-resources investigations of the Geological Survey have i ncreased steadily, particularly since World War II. Between 1945 and 1952 the ntnnber of gaging stations in the Colorado River Basin increased from about 345 to 430, and the ni.nnber in the seven Basin States, excluding the Colorado River Basin itself, increased fran about 78o to 1,020.

-5- Most of the water-resources investigations are ma.de in cooperation with States and municipalities. Funds offered by these sources frequently have exceeded the funds appropriated to the Survey for cooperative work. This indicates an expanding realization by the people on the ground of the need for basic information prior to basin developments. We all are aware of several basic facts: (1) our popul.ation increases steadily; (2) technologies are increasing the per capita use of water; and (3) our water supplies have no marked long-term trend upward or downward. Apparently, then, we face conditions that may lead to water shortages.

The average annual runoff from the Colorado River Basin is approximately 70 acre-feet per square mile, or about one and a third inches. The national average is between 8.5 and 9 inches; average runoff from the 17 Western States is about 4.5 inches, and from the 31 Eastern States, about 15 inches. The total area of the Colorado River Basin, exclusive of the Salton Sea basin, is 246,ooo square miles, or 157,000,000 acres. Irrigable land in the basin totals 7,500,000 acres, including l,000,000 acres in Mexico--less than 5 percent of the basin--according to estimates by the Bureau of Reclama­ tion. Less than one-half the irrigable land is now under irrigation. The average annual runoff of 70 acre-feet per square mile from the entire basin is equivalent to only about 2.2 acre-feet per acre of irrigable land. There­ fore, when we also consider the many present and :future uses for the water outside the basin, by diversion from both the l.ll)per and lower basins, much concern must be given to the limited available supply in meeting the diverse requirements of the region. Water is indeed a vital commodity in the Colorado River Basin and will definitely limit the agr1C1lltural and industrial growth of the region.

Mexico shares our interest in the Colorado River. On the basis of the Treaty of February 1944 and the Protocol of November 1944, the International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, has authority to work out problems relating to the division of waters between the two countries. A February 1945 agreement between the State and Interior Departments provides in part that:

A. The United States Section of the Boundary and Water Commission will: Construct, operate, and maintain new gaging stations as necessary on the Colorado River in the boundary sections and downstream from the Yuma gaging station; and on carrying facilities in the Lower Colorado River area used exclusively for delivery of water to Mexico. B. The Geological Survey will construct, operate and maintain all other stations in the United States, other than those included in paragraph A, over which it now bas or may later have control, including the station at Yuma on the Colorado.

-6- Since 1951 the survey has been compiling in one series of reports summaries of all stream flow records collected throughout the nation prior to 1950, The records are critically examined, revised where necessary, and estimates made to fill in short breaks. Because of its size, this project will be spread over several years, beginning with records for areas where the need appears most urgent, as the Colorado River Basin. About 85 percent of the records for the Basin have been compiled and it is contemplated that the report will be ready for publication as a water-supply paper by 1954.

When the Upper Colorado River Compact was approved, the all-Federal program of stream gaging, sediment, and chemical quality investigations was expanded in that region as it was recognized by the Upper Colorado River Commission that additional data were essential to carry out the term.s of the Compact. Funds for expansion were made available by Congress following a request by the affected States. However, the new network covers only part of that requested and needed, At present, 45 gaging stations are operated in the Upper Basin with these ''Upper Basin Compact" funds. In addition, 29 gaging stations in both Upper and Lower Basins are operated with Colorado River Compact funds, which first became available to the Survey on July 1, 1928.

As an example of the importance of these records: Article III of the Colorado River Compact provides for apportionment of water among the Upper and Lower Basins and the Republic of Mexico. It states that further appor­ tionment of the beneficial uses of the waters of the Colorado River System not apportioned by the Compact may be made after October 1, 1963, if and when either basin shall have reached its total beneficial consumptive use as provided in the Compact. It is imperative, therefore, tbat we plan so that by 1963, we will have the basic data necessary to resolve questions that will arise.

Equitable apportionment of Colorado River water requires answers to two main questions: (1) What is the geographical source of the water, (2) and what disposal is made of it? As present stream flow records are inadequate for resolving these questions, proposals have been made to increase substantially the number of gaging stations throughout the basin. The proposed stations number about 4oo, more than half of which are in the present program. Not all the stations now operated are in this group, because many are operated for specific purposes not directly related to the questions cited above.

Examination by Survey district engineers of these proposals disclosed that many of the new locations would be not readily accessible-- some virtually inaccessible at times. Furthermore, because of shifting channels and flashy runoff, frequent measurements might be necessary to insure accuracy, particularly at high stages. As times of high stage usually coincide with times of inacces­ sibility, resident hydrographers probably would be required at same stations. Construction and operation of those stations would, therefore, be costly. It is recognized that the cost, although a reason for careful scrutiny of a pro­ posed station, cannot be the main criterion.

Same of the stations proposed would be on transmountain diversions, for some of which records are obtained by other agencies but not reviewed by the Survey or published in Water-Supply Papers. In view of the importance of such records for compact information, they should be an integral part of the basin-wide network.

-7- Same of the proposed stations are intended to determine channel losses or consumptive u.ses in reaches of a stream where the difference in flow between upstream and downstream stations is only a few percent. Records for such determinations must be of high accuracy. The cost of stream flow records increases rapidly as the standards of accuracy increase.

Estimated cost of installation of the proposed new stations is about $2,000,000 and annual cost of operation about $1,000,000, which would be large items in our budget. It is increasingly difficult to obtain funds in connection with specific interstate compact needs. Means of financing additional stations requires considerable thought.

More information is needed also on ground water. A true under­ standing of stream flow requires comprehensive information about the relations between surface and ground water. Studies of channel losses or return flow from irrigated areas require investigation both of surface and ground water. Our only intensive studies of ground water in the Colorado River Basin have been in the Salt and Gila basins in Arizona, Las Vegas Valley in Nevada, and the Grand Junction area in Colorado, all places where progressive lowering of water levels has indicated overdevelopment of ground water. For the rest of the basin we know very little about ground water, its relation to stream flow, possibilities of development by wells, or the effect of such development upon stream flow.

Additional information is needed about chemical characteristics of the ground and surface water and sediment loads transported by the streams. As a rule, in the Colorado River Basin water of best quaJ.ity is in headwater areas, and the quaJ.ity tends to deteriorate downstream, especially with use, even to the extent of being unfavorable for certain uses. Same tributaries contribute voll.lllles of sediment and dissolved minerals disproportionately large in relation to their voltnn.es of water. Additional information is needed about the geographical origin of dissolved solids and sediments, before ameliorative measures can be planned intelligently, particularly with respect to proper allowances for sediment accumulation in upstream reservoirs.

The Navy Department, the Bureau of Reclamation and the Geological Survey made a comprehensive survey of Lake Mead in 1949, and we hope to have a detailed report available within the next few months. Conclusions as to sediment accumulations indicate that past estilllates of the economic life of the reservoir have been conservative. The survey shows that the reservoir can hold 35 times as much sediment as it received in the first 14 years of its history. It can store about 17 times as much as that 14-year acc1.lIIIUlation and still have a water-storage capacity of 13 million acre-feet, approximately the average annual inflow, and thus provide some holdover capacity for the Lower Basin• s Compact allotment. It is likely, therefore, that the usef'Ul life of Lake Mead will be measured in centuries. The survey also gives data for predicting the pattern of sedimentation in the proposed Glen Canyon and other reservoirs in the Colorado River Basin.

Although the Lake Mead survey gives answers to many perplexing questions, it also poses new ones, and high-lights our need for greater knowledge of the hydrology of the Colorado River Basin. It shows that we do not know enough about the fundamental relations of the water, dissolved l oad and sediment in the reservoirs and rivers, nor about the areas of origin.

-8- The problems that conf'ront u.s in the Colorado River Basin are complex. An investigationa.l program much more comprehensive than at present is desirable. I suggest that representatives of both the Upper and the Lower Colorado River Basins sit with Geological Survey representatives to reach agreement on a comprehensive program that will supply the water facts needed to make operations under the Colorado River Compacts feasible. SUch programs should be practicable as to operations and financing. The Survey will cooperate in such discussion at any time. *********** IRRIGATION INVESl'IGATIONS OF THE U. S. SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE Harry F. Blaney, Principal Irrigation Engineer

The nucleus of investigations by the Division of Irrigation Engineering and Water Conservation of the Soil Conservation Service was the irrigation work established by Congress in 1898 in the Office of Experiment Stations of the United States Department of AgricuJ.ture. This work was continued by the Division under the Bureau of Public Roads until 1932 and the Bureau of Agricultural Engineering until 1939, and then with the Soil Conservation Service under three major projects: (a} Utilization of Water in Irrigation; (b) Irrigation Conduits and Structures; and (c} Customs, Regulations and Laws Relating to Irrigation. In 1939 the Division was transferred to the Soil Conservation Service.

Investigations by the Division and its predecessors have done much to improve irrigation practice and promote a more economical use of water. They have provided a better foundation for engineering planning of new irrigation enterprises. The Division has assembled a vast fund of technical information concerning irrigation requirements of crops, proper times of ap­ plication of irrigation water, evaporation from soils and water surfaces, capacities and transmission losses of carrying systems, drainage of irrigated lands, consumptive use, water spreading, pumping and water laws. These data are ma.de available through publication of bulletins of federal and state agencies. Sane recent reports deal with water problems in the Colorado River Basin and the Pacific Southwest:

1. Silt in the Colorado River and Its Relation to Irrigation - Fortier and Blaney 2. Putting Down and Developing Wells for Irrigation - Carl Rohwer. Soil Conservation Service, U.S.D.A. Circular No. 546. 1941. 3. Consumptive Water Use and Requirements - Harry F. Blaney, Paul A. Ewing, Karl v. Morin and Wayne D. Criddle. Reprint of the Participating Agencies, Pecos River Joint Investigation. National Resources Planning Board. 1942.

-9- 4. Irrigation Requirements of Cotton on Clay Loam Soils in the Salt River Valley - Karl Harris and R, s. Hawkins. Ariz, Agr. Expt. Sta. Bul.. 181. 1942.

5. Drainage Investigation in Irrigated Areas of Imperial Valley, California - William w. Donnan, v. s. Aronovici and Harry F. Blaney, S.C.S. 1947.

6. Consumptive Use of Water in the Irrigated Areas of the Upper Colorado River Basin - Harry F. Blaney and Wayne D, Criddle. Div, of Irrig. and Water Conservation, S.C.S. 1949. 7. Determining Water Requirements in Irrigated Areas from Climatological and Irrigation Data- Blaney and Criddle. S.C.S., U.S.D.A. SCS-TP-96, 1950. 8 . Consumptive Use of Irrigation Water by Crops in Nevada by Clyde E. Houston. Bul. 185, Nevada Agr. Expt. Station. 1950. 9. Drainage Investigations in Imperial Valley, A 10-Year Summary - William W. Donnan, George B. Bradshaw and Harry F. Blaney. s.c.s. (In press) . 1952. 10, Consumptive Use and Irrigation Requirements of Crops in Arizona - Blaney and Harris. S.C.S. 1952. 11, Drainage Investigation Methods for Irrigated Areas of Western United States - William W. Donnan and Geor ge B. Bradshaw. S.C.S. Tech, Bul. 1065. 1952.

12. Water Spreading in San Joaquin Valley - Dean Muckel and Leonard Schiff.

A knowledge of consumptive use and its relationship t o water supply is necessary in planning a farm irrigation system and improving irrigation practices.

During recent years, at the request of Operations Division of the Soil Conservation Service and other Federal and State Agencies, the Division of Irrigation Engineering and Water Conservation staff has compiled available data and determined consumptive use and irrigation water requirements for crops in the West. In some districts these data are necessary before the safe yield of the underground water basins can be estilllated. In cooperation with the State Engineer of California, engineering studies are being made of water consumption by irrigated crops and native vegetation in the Santa Margarita River Basin in Riverside and San Diego counties. Assistance is being rendered on water spreading in Central Valley and in estimating consumptive use and irrigation requirements for the entire State of California.

In water supply investigations of river basins such as the Colorado River, consumptive use and ultimate water requirement for irrigation projects are important factors. From a valley-wide standpoint, consumptive use includes

-10- all transpiration and evaporation from lands on which there is vegetation of any kind, whether agricultural crops or native vegetation, plus evaporation from bare a...,id idle land and from water surfaces. In some basins the amount of water used in evaporation and transpiration by native vegetation is greater than the amount consumed by irrigated crops.

Consumptive use by water-loving natural vegetation such as pbreatophytes is increasing in the Colorado River Basin. Phreatopbytes ccmprise a great variety, ranging from saltgrass to cottonwood trees. River-bottom growths, such as salt cedars (Tamarisk), cottonwoods, willows (Baccharis) and tules, consume more water per given area than irrigated crops. In the Pecos River Joint Investigation the Division of Irrigation estimated that 61,000 acre- feet of water were consumed in 1939 by 13,000 acres of salt cedar. The Pacific Southwest Federal Inter-Agency Technical Committ ee and the New Mexico Salt Cedar Action Committee have set up subcommittees to study the control of phreatophytes. Use of water by these water- loving plants has been measured in severaJ. river basins by the Division of Irrigation Engineering and Water Conservation and the U. s. Geological Survey. Additional information is needed on water use by pbreatophytes and replacement vegetation.

A report entitled "Soil Conservation Service Assistance to Irrigation Agriculture in the Western United States" was issued in November, 1952 by the Department of Agriculture. Extracts relative to work with soil conservation districts, assistance to farmers, water-supply forecasting and irrigation research a.re as fol1ows:

"The Soil Conservation Service bas supplied technical assistance for many years to irrigation farmers, including settlers on project areas developed by the Bureau of Reclamation. It has also aided hundreds of small farmer-operated irrigation districts or groups which lack engineering or .other technical facilities.

"Service assistance has consisted mainly of technical help in engineering planning and design, but bas also included help on problems of surface and ground-water supply, soil management, cropping systems, and many related aspects of profitable irrigation farming. The Service has assumed leadership in most of the Western States in forecasting seasonal water supply from cooperative snow surveys. Moreover, it bas carried on an aggressive program of irrigation research to develop more efficient and economical methods of water supply, conveyance, distribution, and application on the farm ...

''The Soil Conservation Service makes its help available through soil conservation districts, which are local governmental units organized under State laws and administered by farmers and ranchers. The Service cooperates with these districts under memoranda of under­ standing as a means of helping them to plan and carry out their programs of soil and water conservation and management, including improvement of group irrigation facilities as needed and recommended by the districts . ..

-11- "Solution of problems in water management (irrigation and drainage practices), including conveyance, application, and removal of excess water, and the adoption of field practices based on these solutions, are essential to continued production of the lands being currently irrigated and to new lands that will be irrigated in projects now being constructed or con­ templated. "It is a part of the basic and continuing responsibility of of the Department of Agriculture to do the research and provide the technical aid needed on these agricultural problems in order to protect the large investments of the Federal Government and the landowners and operators on irrigated lands."

The research work of the Soil Conservation Service - - carried on in cooperation with the Bureau of Plant Industry, Soils, and Agricultural Engin­ eering, the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, and the State Experiment Stations -- is related primarilY to engineering aspects of water management (irrigation and drainage), including irrigation water supplies and their physical control, irrigation water requirements, methods of water application, conveyance and prevention or removal and disposal of excess water (drainage). *********** RECENT AND CONTEMPLATED ACTIVITIES OF THE BUREAU OF RECLAMATION IN THE COLORADO RIVER BASIN Wade H, Taylor, Assistant Director, Region 3

A year ago the Bureau had completed nine irrigation and multiple­ purpose projects in the Upper Colorado River Basin, These are operated by the water users. All. are current in meeting obligations to the Government for return of project co~ts. On December 10, 1951, the 6-mile Duschesne Tunnel, to carry water from the south slope of the Uinta Mountains into the headwaters of the Provo River, Utah, was holed through; by November 6, 1952 it had been concrete lined. It will divert an average of 34,4-00 acre-feet a year from the Colorado River Basin to the Provo River Project in the Bonneville Basin,

On the Paonia Project on the North Fork of the Gunnison River east of Delta, Colorado, work was continued on distribution facilities. Contract was let for the 1.8 mile Fire Mountain Canal Extension.

On the Eden Project, 40 miles north of Rock Springs, Wyoming, the $1,030,000 Big Sandy Dam and Dike has been completed and the $500,000 Eden Canal is under construction.

On July 3, 1952, Congress authorized the Collbran Project which

would supplement the water supply for 201 000 acres in Plateau Valley east of Grand Junction, Colorado, chiefly through construction of the 30,500 acre-foot Vega Reservoir on Plateau Creek. It would also provide municipal

- 12- water for Grand Junction and generate 5~ million kilowatt-hours annually. At the tillle of authorization Congress did not provide construction funds. The Project is a l ikely "new start." It is not a participating part of the Colorado River Storage Project.

Newspapers of December 3, 1952, reported that the Secretary of the Interior had submitted the Colorado River Storage Project Report to the Bureau of the Budget and had recommended delaying construction of Echo Park and Split Mountain Dams pending further study, because of their location in Dinosaur National. Monument .

The Colorado River Storage Project consists of 10 major dams on the Colorado River and main tributaries, plus as many powerplants. It would provide river regulation, power production, and benefits to irrigation through power revenues used to assist in paying the costs of related irrigation projects, that is, ''participating projects," using Upper Colorado River Basin water.

The participating projects are:

Wyoming: Eden, La Barge, Seedskadee, and Lyman.

Colorado: Paonia, Smith Fork, and Silt.

Colorado-New Mexico: Pine River Extension, and Florida. New Mexico: Hammond .

Utah: Centr al Ut ah (initial phase), Emery County, and Gooseberry.

Six of the large reservoirs would lie all or partly in Utah; one partly in Wyoming; five all or partly in Colorado; one partly in Arizona; and one in New Mexico. The key reservoir of the Storage Project would be the 26,000,000 acre-foot Glen Canyon Reservoi r, of outstanding importance not only to the Upper but to the Lower Basin.

All Upper Basin States have approved the storage plan as essential to full use of the waters apportioned to the Upper Basin by the Colorado River Compact.

In the Lower Basin, the Bureau has started the 71-mile Second Barrel of the San Diego Aqueduct, with funds supplied by the Navy Department. Con­ tractors are at work on the first half and t he award and notice to proceed on the remainder will probably be given in a few days.

In the Coachella Division, All-Amer ican Canal System, the Bureau is completing the distribution system to 9,6oo acres between Mecca and Thermal, and preparing specifications for the distribution system to 4,6oo acr es centering 4 miles southwest of Indi o.

Under a supplemental contract of March 4, 1952, the I:mperial Irriga­ tion District on May 1, 1952 assumed care and operation of the All-American Canal headworks and desilting basins at I:mperial Dam, and the section of the Canal innnediately downstream.

-13- To protect the flood plain area of the Colorado River in the vicinity of Yuma from potential backing-up effects of Morelos Dam in Lower California, the Bureau is finishing the strengthening and raising of levees in the Yuma Project.

In anticipation of shortly beginning dredging the Colorado River channel upstream from Needles a temporary work bridge has been thrown across the river near Needles. Maintenance dredging of the recentlY completed Needles-Topock channel has been carried on . On the Wellton-Mohawk Division, Gila Project, the three pumping plants a.re in operation at partial capacity. Through temporary distribution means devised by the water users for come -and-get- it service, t he Wellton­ Mohawk Division supplied Colorado River water to nearly 10,000 acres of cropped land this year. Units 1 and 2 of the Mohawk Distribution system are under construction and bids on Unit 3 will be opened this week, Con­ struction of the final section of the Wellton Canal and Unit 1 of the Wellton-Mohawk distribution system is under way .

In the next few years 120 fann units will be made available for settlement in the Wellton-Mohawk Division. On the Yuma Mesa Division, 27 units were awarded to veterans in recent months . A six-million dollar rehabilitation program on the Salt River Project is about half accomplished, including lining canals and laterals and grouting the abutment and joints of Stewart Mountain Dam.

Three more generating units were placed in operation in the Hoover Powerplant: the 50,000-kw Unit A-9 for Nevada, and the 82,500-kw Units A-3 and A-4 for Arizona. With the assistance of Governors and other state officials, and leaders in reclamation, the Interior Department will dedicate Davis Dam next Wednesday.

Region 3 is completing a report on the Fort Mohave Project, in the southernmost tip of Nevada. Drafts of reports on the Dixie Project in southwestern Utah and on the Moapa Valley Project on the Muddy River, 50 miles north of Las Vegas, are being revised.

Two Colorado River projects in Region 3 are considered certain to be built: (1) Bridge Canyon Dam and Powerplant at the head of Lake Mead with its auxiliary, Coconino Dam for sediment detention on Little Colorado River; and (2) Marble Canyon Dam and Powerplant, 39 miles below Lees Ferry. As funds and personnel permit, coordinated operation and network analyzer studies are being made in connection with both projects, for use in planning integrated power system operations of Colorado River plants. The field crew at Marble Canyon has completed the current program for foundation exploration, is making access road surveys, and will work next on detailed surveys for Coconino Reservoir. We desire to be ready to go ahead rapidiy with Marble, Bridge, and Coconino after authorization.

Several years ago the Upper Colorado River Compact Connnission made a comprehensive study of the water supplY of the Upper Basin. Region 3 is now engaged in a parallel study of the Lower Basin.

-14- DEVELOPMENT OF THE SALT RIVER PROJECT

Daniel Boone, Treasurer, Salt River Valley Water Users Association, Arizona

The first irrigation by white settlers in the Salt River Valley began in 1865 with formation of an irrigation company, clearing of land and digging of canals. By 1867 the population of this Arizona territory was 6,500. Eighteen other canal companies vere formed and new land put under cultivation. It soon becSllle evident that there was not sufficient water in the river during summer months, and that the only way to expand irrigation in the Valley was to provide storage of winter floodwaters. A committee selected to study storage possibilities discovered, in 1889, an ideal d8lll site in a gorge of the Salt River. Mr. A, B. Fowler was sent to Washi.ngton to persuade Congress to all.ow Maricopa County to bond itsel.f to finance construction of the project. But the Congressmen would not listen. They said that if Arizona must have its project it should be financed privately, but that Mr. Fowler's proposal would put the nation on a wild spending spree.

But Mr. George H. Maxwell., l.awyer-engineer, saw the possibilities of this Arizona enterprise and, moved by his eloquence, some Congressmen began to change their minds. Representative Newlands of Nevada joined in preparing a reclamation bill. President Teddy Roosevelt, who believed the West could be developed in rapid and orderly fashion only by a wise and prompt progrBlll of public expenditures, urged Congress to pass the bil.l, and on June 17, 1902, signed the Hansbrough-Newlands Act, ccmmonly referred to as the Reclamation Act. The Salt River Valley Water Users' Association was organized in 1902; basic reasons being to establish for the benefit of the United States and the water users a central organization which could: (1) Represent individual water users in dealing with the Secretary of the Interior; (2) Guarantee payment of the construction cost to the govermuent and enforce collection of each installment from individuals;

(3) Assume at a f'uture date, operation and management of the Project and distribution of water to land owners in accordance with water rights.

(4) In.sure equitabl.e distribution of costs and assessments among members of the Association.

An agreement between the Association and the Department of the Interior covering construction of the Sa1t River Project was executed on June 25, 1904. Among other things it recited that the Secretary of the Interior contempl.ated construction of a d8lll on Salt River, the estimll.ted cost being $2,700,000 or $15 per acre on the 18o,OOO acres then in the Association. It was later decided to increase the storage depth of the

-15- reservoir from 190 feet to 220 feet, and to include production and trans­ mission of power for use in developing underground water and for drainage purposes.

In 1907 the United States acquired title to the water distribution system, and began to rehabilitate or relocate existing canals and construct new ones. Several power drops along these new canals could be developed at an estilllated cost of $9()0,000, but since money in the Reclamation Fund at that time was not available for development of power, the U.S. asked the Association to provide f'unds. Shareholders of the Project at a special election authorized the Association to enter a contract with the govermn.ent for such construction.

The dam was commenced in 1905, and in 1911, dedicated and officially named for President Roosevelt who attended the event. At that time it was the largest storage reservoir and dam in the world and is today the world's highest masonry dam. According to the 11th Annual Report of the U.S. Recla­ Jllation Service, the cost of the project to June 30, 1912 was $9,508,831.12. When the Water Users' Association was formed, relative rigb.t.s to the water of Salt River had not been determined. The Articles of Incorpora­ tion ma.de no attempt to rights; neither did the contract between the Associa­ tion and the United States. In 1905, suit was instituted by P. T, Hurley against Charles S. Abbott and other land owners in which Mr, Hurley sought to have his title quieted to the use of an amount of water suf'f'icient to irrigate lands owned by him. The United States, by consent of the Court, intervened as a party. It sought and obtained process to make party defendant to its cross-complaint, the 48oo owners of lands subject to irrigation from Project canals. It asked for ju.dgjnent establishing rigb.ts and priority date of each defendant and each parcel of land to water of the Salt River and its tributaries. Such decision was entered by Judge Edward Kent, Chief Justice of the Territorial Court, sitting as District Judge, on March 1, 1910, effective on and after April 1, 1910,

The first distribution of water stored behind Roosevelt Dam was lllade in 1910. However, official completion of the Project was delayed until 1917, due to additional construction within the Project. Prior to 1917, the shareholders became disturbed over increasing costs, all of which were to be paid by owners of lands of the Project. Members of the Association were also dissatisfied with the manner in which the Government was operating the Project, particularly in the application of the power revenues derived from Project works. A conference was held between the Secretary of the Interior and Arthur P. Davis of the U.S. Reclamation Service, repre.sfnting the United States, and Arizona's Congressman, Carl Hayden, the Association'~ President John Orme, and Counsel Joseph H. Kibbey. A memorandum of this conference, by Mr. Davis, reads in part:

''rhe Secretary then announced to the Arizona delegation that he was anxious to get rid of the Project and if they would enter into a contract to take care of all future expendi­ tures and return the entire cost of the Proj­ ect, he would turn the Project over to them and they might apply all power receipts in any way they saw fit."

-16- Such agreement, signed September 6, 1917, with certain supplements is still in effect and contains the basic principle upon which the Project is operated today. Controlling feat1U"es are that:

(1) Subject to terms and conditions of the agreement, the United States, as soon as the agreement was signed, would turn over to and vest in said Association the care, operation and maintenance of the irrigation works known as the Salt River Project.

(2) The Association agreed to accept such transfer and to care for, operate and maintain the Project in conformance with the law and the agreement in such manner that the Project would continue in good and sufficient condition for storage, development, diversion and distribution of irrigation water and distribution of electrical energy produced, at the Association's cost and without cost to the United States. (3) The Association would repay to the United States the cost of construction and acquisition of said Project promptly and without default, such total cost at the time being $10,166,021.97. (4) The Association use its powers and resources, accumulative, if necessary, including the power to withhold delivery of water, to enforce rules and regulations and collect necessary funds to repay construction costs.

(5) The Association hold the United States ba.rmless as to any damages which might accrue to property within or vithout the reservoir district growing out of the care, operation and maintenance of the Project by the Association.

(6) The Secretary of the Interior might inspect the Project to ascertain if provisions of the agreement were being carried out.

(7) The Association would make proper delivery of irrigation water to each parcel of land entitled to water.

(8) The agreement might be terminated by the United States at any time by written notice from the Secretary of the Interior in event the Association should fail to carry out the provisions of law or the agreement.

(9) The Association would keep proper records. (10) The Association would assume and carry out all contracts entered into between the United States and others affected by construc­ tion of the Project.

-17- (11) The Secretary of the Interior be given the rig)lt to make reasonable rules and regulations in carrying out the true intent and meaning of the law and the agreement so long as they are not inconsistent with the actual provisions of the agreement. After the Association took over the Project, it commenced to auginent the water supply and power facilities. Three dams were built on Salt River below Roosevelt Dam: Mormon Flat Dam and power house, finished in 1925, cost $2,497,000; Horse Mesa Dam., 1927, cost $5,248,000; SJJ.d the thixd and last, Stewart Mountain Dam, 1930, cost $2,839,000. They were financed through private sources, and the power in excess of Project needs sold to public utilities and mining interests.

Mditional lBllda were taken into the Project, raising the total from the initial 180,000 acres to 24o,OOO acres. Electrification of the entire Salt River Valley was undertaken in the late 1920's and early 1930's by private financing.

The Project still had an insufficient supply of irrigation water, and undertook to build storage on Verde River. Since the Paradise Valley, north of Salt River Valley, had been granted an appropriation by the United States to construct a dam on the Verde River, the Salt River Project had to prove that the Verde River supply was not sufficient for the proposed irriga­ tion in Paradise Valley, and that the water should be used to augment the inadequate supply for land in the Salt River Project already under cultivation. The management was successful, SJJ.d the United States withdrew the appropria­ tion to Paradise Valley and entered into a contract with the Salt River Val.ley Water Users' Association to construct Bartlett Dam, the fixst on the Verde. It was cc:mpleted in 1939, and with improvements on the Salt River Dams, cost $6,500,000. Power production at Bartlett was not economically feasible.

From 1917 to 1937, all construction by the Salt River Project was financed from private sources through bond issues. The cost of this financing was extremely hig)l because irrigation projects operated by private co;rporations bad no tax advantages and poor credit ratings. In 1937, the Salt River Project Agricultural Improvement and Power District, a political sub-division of the State of Arizona was organized, comprising the same lands as those of the Salt River Valley Water Users• Association. Under a contract approved by the United States, the Agricultural Improvement and Power District assumed the total debt of the Water Users' Association, both private and that owed to the United States, and the Association turned over to the District title to all property which it held at that time. The Association continued to operate the power and irrigation facilities as agent of the District. The District held elections, and authorized a bond issue to refund the private debt. The bonds were sold at a better price and less interest, and the cost of the private debt of the Project was thereby reduced.

In 1941 the District sold bonds and constructed the Crosscut Steam Plant of 37,500 horsepower at a cost of $2,300,000. Another dam was built in 1944 on Verde River in cooperation with Phelps Dodge Corporation and the City of Phoenix at a cost of $3,425,000. An additional 12,500 horsepower steam generating unit was added in 1948 at a cost of $1,000,000, Through District bond issues, a new 50,000 horsepower steam plant was completed in

-18- 1952 at a cost of $4,500,000 and a second unit of 100,000 horsepower is being added at a cost of $9,000,000. Total cost of Project works to date has been $72,300,000, of which approximately $20,000,000 was financed through the United States and $52,000,000 from private sources. Today the Project is operating six dams, four hydro plants with a total capacity of 95,000 horsepower; two steam plants with a capacity of

1001 000 horsepower; 1,327 miles of canals, laterals and ditches, 2,500 miles of power lines with associated facilities to serve 38,000 irrigation water accounts and 34,000 electric consumers. It would have been impossible at the time this Project was conceived to have constructed such an excellent medium for distribution of power and water in Central Arizona without assistance and initial financing by the United States. We have had our differences with various departments of the Government, but they have been settled to the satisfaction of both parties, allowing the continued construction and operation of what we consider the first and most successful multiple purpose reclamation project in the United States. *********** ASSUMING THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF A BUREAU OF RECLAMATION PROJECT BY A WATER USERS GROUP John C. Smith, Jr., President Yuma County Water Users Association, Arizona

The Yuma County Water Users Association took over operation of the Val.ley Division of the Yuma Project from the U.S. B.R. only 2 years ago. The Valley Division is in the extreme southwest part of Arizona on the delta of Colorado River and was constructed by the Bureau of Reclamation prior to World War I. Comprising 50,000 acres, this area receives water diverted from Colorado River at Imperial Dam and down the California side of the river by canal to a point north of Yuma, where it is siphoned under the river into our Ma.in Canal. Main features of the Division are the distribution system, drainage system, Colorado River siphon and the protective levee. The distribution system has 200 miles of canals and laterals. Water is diverted from the Main Canal into the East Ma.in and the West Main Canals and from them into smaller canals and laterals. The two main canals traverse the length of the Valley, one on either side, and irrigate 25,000 acres each. There are 100 miles of drainage canals. One large drain, centrally located extends the length of the valley, with smaller drains emptying into it. The south boundary of the valley is the Boundary between the United States and Mexico and because of this and the fact that the slope of the valley is only one foot to the mile, the collecting sump at the Boundary Pumping Plant is below the river level making it necessary to pump the drainage water into the river. The river runs at an elevation of 85 ~- at the Boundary and we need to keep our drainage elevation down to at least 75 ft.

The Yuma County Water Users Association is a private corporation set up under the laws of the State of Arizona, with each acre entitling the owner to one share in the Corporation. The Board of Governors of which there are five, elected by the shareholders, constitutes the policy-making body.

-19- Upon taking over the operation and maintenance of the project, the Board hired a Project Manager. He set up an organization built around 5 depart­ ments: Operations; Hyrography; Maintenance, Drainage and Construction; Engineering; Administration.

The Operation Department has the most important function in the organization since it gets water to the farmer when and in the amount he wants. It is headed by the Watermaster, who has 11 ditchriders to control the deliveries. We have put each ditchrider on 24 hours, 7 days a week and employed his wife to answer the telephone when he is absent. No system of deliveries can be successful unless all users of water cooperate. With this in mind, we have placed in the hands of the farmers some of the work in turning water to each other, with the ditchrider controlling and measuring the amount of each delivery. So far, this has been successful, with a minimum of ditch breaks.

Since we have to deliver water all year, we have a serious problem in weed and moss control. We placed this duty on the Watermaster because he can coordinate the emptying of canals with the spraying and burning of canal banks. We cut the water out of our system 3 days a month t o help in control of moss.

The Maintenance, Drainage and Construction Department, is rehabili­ tating the distribution system and drainage system. The program on the distribution system is about complete, but the drainage system is a headache. We have a problem which probably no other project in Arizona has now and that is too much underground water. We are rebuilding our Boundary Pumping Plant to increase the capacity to 300 cfs., lower the elevation of water in our drains and to get credit for delivery of the water to Mexico under the Mexican Treaty. This water has to be put back into the river before it crosses the Boundary to be credited as Mexican Treaty Water. We have also started a program of cleaning our drains every other year. *********** EXAMPIE OF CONFLICT BETWEEN LOCAL AND FEDERAL PROJECT POWER DEVELOPMENT

Fisher Harris, General Counsel, Provo River Water Users Association, Utah

A conflict has arisen as to whether the Provo River Water Users Association or the United States shall develop the power possibilities of the Deer Creek Division of the Provo River Project of the Bureau of Reclama­ tion, in Utah.

On June 27, 1936 the Association entered into a contract with the United States for construction of the Deer Creek Division. Article 38 of the contract reads in part as follows:

-20- "APPLICATION OF PROFITS FROM POWER DEVELOPMENT AND OTl!ER OPERATIONS "38. (a) Power Development. Either the United States, or the association, with the approval of the Secretary, may develop the power possibilities of the project, provided such development does not impair the yield of water from the project nor interfere with the operations thereof for the primary purpose of utilizing the developed water supply of the project for irrigation, municipal, domestic and industrial purposes other than power. *** (b) Application of profits from power develo ment and other erations. Net income from the sale of surplus power being power not utilized for proj­ ect purposes)** shall, upon collection, be remitted to the United States for application on construction charges due or to become due*** until all obligations of the Association to the United States shall have been liquida­ ted. After all payments have been made as above provided, the net power revenues shall:

"(1) belong to the Association in case the Associa­ tion develops the power possibilities at its own expense, or "(2) be disposed of as Congress shall direct, in case the power possibilities are developed by the United states, or with funds advanced by the United states."

Deer Creek dam and reservoir was completed by the United States under this contract early in 1942, with power house penstocks and foundations . The original estimated cost was $7,600,000, but on December 20, 1946, the con­ tract was amended to provide for expenditure and repayment of $11,400,000, and on February 2, 1949, a supplemental contract was entered into providing for expenditure and repayment of such additional amounts as might be necessary to completion. It is now estimated the total cost will be $18,000,000.

In the meantime, and though the subject had been often referred to it by the Association, the Bureau of Reclamation did nothing toward development of the power possibilities, asserting instead that they did not admit of profitable development unless and until construction of parts of the proposed Central Utah Project. But officers and directors of the Association did not accept this ipsi dixit; they made independent investigation, and formulated a plan under which power development would be undertaken for it by private enterprise, - the Utah Power & Light Company. This plan involves no financial outlay by the Association and no expenditure of public funds; it guarantees a minimum annual return of $40,000 to the Association for payment to the United States on the greatly increased cost of the dam and reservoir, which the Association is required to repay. Ultimate ownership of the power plant by the Association is assured. The Association guarantees nothing, the Power Company assuming all expense and hazards.

-21- With this plan before it, the Board of Directors on November 10, 1950, passed the followicg resolution:

"BE IT RESOLVED, That the Provo River Water Users Association does hereby elect to develop the power possibilities of the Deer Creek Division of the Provo River Project of the United States Bureau of Reclama­ tion, and that the Secretary of the Interior be in­ formed of this action and his approval be requested." A copy was sent to the Regional Director of Region 4 on November 14, 1950. In response, he made, for the first time; a study of the power poten­ tialities, and on January 24, 1951, connnunicated his conclusions to the Board of Directors, proposing that the United States construct the power plant. The proposal of Utah Power & Light was substantially more advantageous to the Association than that of the government, and accordingly by letter of February 7, 1951, approval by the Secretary of the Interior of power develop­ ment by the Association was sought. By letter of May 9, 1951 the Secretary withheld approval, saying: "In view of the Federal construction already in place and the steps that are being taken toward the completion of the project, I do not feel disposed to approve a plan of the Association to complete the construction of the facilities necessary to generate power . "

Directors of the Association were astonished and dismayed, and by letter of June 17, 1951 renewed request for approval, saying:

"It is true the contract states that development of the power possibilities by the Association shall be 'with the approval of the Secretary'; but that has always, until your letter of May 9, been taken by all concerned to mean approval of the general nature of the plan of development, of plant design, a determination of consistency with use of the project water supply for irrigation, municipal and industrial uses other than power, and the possession by the Association of means in his judgment adequate to the purpose. There is no question in regard to any of these matters and no question concerning them is raised by your letter. "It has always been taken as matter of course that, subject to these considerations, approval of the Secretary would follow as of course any Association request such as that made by resolution of its Board of Directors on November 10, 1950. Certainly, until recently, it has never been suggested by any Federal officer nor has it so much as crossed the mind of any officer of the Association that approval was contingent upon the will alone of anyone, or that it might be dependent upon Federal plans at the time approval was sought . " The Secretary again declined to approve, saying by letter of July 30:

-22- ''Relative to your comments concerning Article 38 of the Repayment Contract between the United States and the Provo River Water Users Association, I cannot agree that the provision for Secretarial approval calls merely for the ministerial function described in your letter. Surely it must be conceded that Article 38 envisions Federal development as well as Association development. It seems apparent in these circumstances that the requirement of Secretarial approval is intended primarily to protect and preserve the rights of the United States to carry forward its own development plans."

This the Association answered by letter of September 24, 1951:

"Surely it must be conceded, and is, that Article 38 envisions Federal as well as Association development, and the conditions to be satisfied by either are set forth in the article itself. After many years of Federal negJ.ect the Association made the first election.

"Certainly it is not 'apparent• from anything in Articl e 38 that the necessity for Secretarial approval was intended 'primarily' or at all to protect and pre­ serve the rights of the United States to carry forward its own development plans. The implications of the article and the extraneous facts are of opposite effect. At the time the article was agreed upon the United States had no power development plans of its own affecting the Deer Creek Division of the Provo River Project. The Deer Creek Dam was constructed for the exclusive benefit of the Provo River Water Users Association, and the power development features built into the Deer Creek Dam were and still are charged a.gainst it on the government records as a part of the construction costs.

"The Federal government neither had nor has any "rights" in the premises to be protected or preserved. What it had and has are obligations -- obligations to the water users for whom alone the project was constructed and for whom alone the benefits of its power possibilities were planned and promised."

There the matter rested until about July l, 1952 when, it having been brought to his personal attention again, the Secretary consented to a re-hearing in Washington on July 3, during which he asked for and was promised the Power Company proposal in detail. This proposal was received by the Association on August 5, and presented to its Board of Directors on August 8. Meantime, the Bureau of Reclamation had in preparation a second plan for development of project power by the government, and in deference to request of the Regional Director, consideration of, action upon, and transmittal of the Power Company's proposal was deferred until completion and exposition of that plan. The Regional Director appeared before the Directors of the Association on September 22 and October 24, and then the Board was finally able to determine the course appropriate to its interests and obligations. It adopted this:

-23- "BE IT RESOLVED, That the Provo River Water Users Association re-affirms and reiterates the action taken by it on November 10, 1950 by -which it was resolved 'That the Provo River Water Users Association does hereby elect to develop the power possibilities of the Deer Creek Division of the Provo River Project of the United States Bureau of Reclamation, and that the Secretary of the Interior be informed of this action and his approval be requested.•" The essence of the Association's action was to express its desire and intention, unless checked by arbitrary power, to manage and control its own project; to itself determine its best interest and to act in accord with it by means of such resources as may be available. The decision is largely and sufficiently based upon economic interest; but that has not been its single inducement; it has been influenced in substantial measure by the protracted indifference of government officers charged with an obligation qf solicitude concerning the subject; by their strangely unsympathetic and even hostile reception of a plan for the Associa­ tion's benefit, the result of its unaided and even discouraged efforts; and by the insincerity and at times the arrogance with which the government's views in opposition have been stated and :l.mposed, - the :1.mplication of all of which is not reassuring.

On the 24th of last month the formal proposal of the Utah Power & Light Company was sent to the Secretary, and the entire situation was re­ viewed as outlined above. Thelletter related the decision of the Association Directors by resolution of October 24, and ended with this request:

"All in all, the officers and directors of the Provo River Water Users Association, charged with sole responsibility for the conduct of its business in the interest alone of the water users, its stockholders, feel strongly impelled to ask again that this business, so far advanced more than two years ago by their own initiative, be committed with your approval to them for conclusion." The Secretary has not yet acted upon the request. ***********

ADVANTAGES OF SMALL RESERVOIBS Perry W. Jenkins Green River Development Compa.qy, Wyoming

(Mr. Jenkins gave an informative description of the accomplishments in the Green River basin, Wyoming, in the development and utilization of water resources by means of small reservoirs constructed and financed by private endeavor.)

-24- OPERATING, MANAGEMENT AND FINANCIAL PROBLEMS OF LOCALLY OPERATED AND CONTRQU.ED PROJECTS

(Group discussion of the subject was led by Evan T. Hewes and R. J. McMullin, with Hampton c. Godbe as moderator.) ***********

PROBLEMS OF IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DierRICT RELATING TO SALTON SEA, DRAINAGE, AND QUALITY OF WATER

M. J. Dowd, Consulting Engineer

I - SALTON SEA

Description of Basin Salton Sea, in northern Imperial. County and southern Riverside County, California, is the "sump hole" of an enclosed basin comprising 7,500 square miles, of which about 1,000 square miles is in Mexico. The basin extends f'rom San Gorgonio Pass some 200 miles southeasterly to the ridge that divides the Colorado River delta between that part which drains southerly into the Gulf of California and that part which drains northerly into Salton Sea. At its lowest point, the ridge is 47 feet above sea level. A large part of this basin is below sea level, the lowest point 273,5 feet below. Salton Sea receives not only the storm runoff from this basin, but also the drainage from 550,000 a.cres of presently irrigated land in Imperial and Coachella Valleys, California, and 150,000 acres in the Mexicali Valley of Mexico .

Past Overflows into Basin

In past ages the basin has been filled to various depths over long periods by overflow from Colorado River, during which silt was deposited to depths of more than 1,000 feet. Overflow created a large lake in the Bo•s, and again in 1891 when it covered 100,000 acres. How­ ever, dry years followed and the basin was dry when me.n commenced development of Imperial Valley in 1900.

River Break of 1905-07

As a result of a break in 1905, the entire River discharged into the Valley for nearly tvo years, and created the present Salton Sea. At closure of the break in February 1907, the Sea covered 350,000 acres and had an elevation 195 feet below sea level. For the next 13 years excess of evaporation over inflow caused the Sea to drop rapidly. However, by 1920 return flow from irrigation in Imperial and Mexicali Valleys caught Up with evaporation, and the rate of lowering slowed down. From a low of 250 feet below sea level in 1925 the Sea rose 7 feet by 1931, due to a plentiful water supply for irrigation and severe local storms. Thereafter

-25- water shortages, particularfy in 1931 and 1934, caused crop losses in Imperial Valley, and a drop in the Sea level to another minimum of -248 feet in 1935,

Present Situation

Since CCIIIJJl.encement of storage behind Hoover Dam in 1935, there has been ample water in the lower river, and the Sea has risen. It is now 237 feet below sea level and the surface area is 215,000 acres. For the past several years it has been rising rapi~; 1,5 feet in 1951, Sever al writers have implied that the rise was unaccountable, and that little is known about the Sea. They make no mention of investigations that have been made or of monthly gage readings of the elevation since 1904. They imply that the rise threatens the existence of Imperial and Coachella Valleys. One writer attributes the rise to seepage from the Gulf of California through cracks in the delta - an absurd theory.

Fallacy of Seepage Theory

The delta may be likened to a dam between Salton Sea basin and the Gulf of California; constructed with silt deposited as the River flowed back and forth across its delta. This dam has a height of about 300 feet . In top width a man-made dam would be, perhaps, 100 feet - nature's dam is 8 to 10 miles. A man-made dam would have a freeboard of 5 or 10 feet - nature I s has 35 feet. The base thickness of a man-made dam would be 2,000 feet - nature's dam is 14o miles. Taking these factors into account, plus the fact that nature's dam has remained intact for centuries, it would seem that Imperial Valley has little to fear from the possibility of seepage from the Gulf.

Factors Involved in Rise of Sea

There is nothing unaccountable or unprecedented about the rapid rise in the last several years. Whenever inflow from local storms and return flow from irrigation exceed evaporation, the Sea rises. A number of times in the last 50 years the Sea has come up as much as 1. 5 feet in a year. Runoff from single storms has raised the elevation 0.75 to 1 .5 feet. Summer storms followed by a cool, wet fall and winter were a decided factor in the 1.5 foot rise of 1951. There had been few summer storms for years. Other factors are the 100,000 acres increase in irrigated acreage, and the increase in efficiency of drainage in Imperial Valley, with consequent increase in return flow to Salton Sea. In 1948, diversions from Colorado River to Imperial and Coachella Valleys totalled 2,900,000 acre-feet; in 1951 the total was over 3,500,000. Another factor was a change in the crops grown. 1951 saw a return of cotton to Imperial Valley for the first time in 20 years - 28,000 acres in 1951 and 88,000 in 1952. Cotton is a heavy user of water and results in greater return flow than many other crops. These factors combined explain the rise of Salton Sea, and as development of the area increases, will no doubt result in a further rise - it is nothing weird or mysterious and can be fulfy accounted for.

-26- Future Elevation of Salton Sea

"At what elevation will Salton Sea become stabilized?" Unknown factors make a definite answer difficult. An extensive system of drains must be constructed to permit continued farming of the 150,000 acres in Mexico within the drainage area of Salton Sea. What will these drains contribute to Salton Sea? The 1944 water treaty between the United States and Mexico is silent as to wasting of water from Mexican canals to Salton Sea. What may this waste amount to in the future? As upstream development occurs, the salinity of water in the Lower River will increase, and the irrigated area tributary to Salton Sea may receive five or six million tons of salt a year. This salt will have to be passed on to Salton Sea in order to maintain a salt balance in the area. How much water will it require?

In 1924 when Salton Sea was approaching 250 feet below sea level the Government withdrew from entry all public lands in the area more than 244 feet below sea level and created a Public Water Reserve, allowing for a freeboard of 6 feet. But in 1927 the U. s. Geological Survey concluded that the maximum future elevation of the Sea might approach 220 feet below sea level. So the Government in 1928 withdrew from entry all public lands in the area below that elevation, adding it to the Public Water Reserve.

In view of these facts, it may be anticipated that Salton Sea will continue to rise for a number of years, the rate depending upon various factors, including weather conditions. The elevation of -220 feet set by the U.S.G.S. is 17 feet higher than the present water level, and may or may not be too conservative. District's Acquisition of Private Lands

As a result of the investigation of the U.S.G.S., and its ovn studies, I.mperial Irrigation District acquired fee title or flooding rights to practi­ cally all the private lands under and around Salton Sea below elevation -230 feet. Probability of the Sea reaching a higher elevation in the future was recognized, but it was felt such acquisition was as much as the District could undertake. Cost to date exceeds half a million dollars. District Does Not "Waste" Water

From time to time, one hears it said that I.mperial Irrigation District diverts an excessive amount of water from Colorado River and wastes it to Salton Sea in order to build up water rights, or for power purposes. Neither of these accusations is true. The irrigation system operated by the District totals 18oO miles in length. In order to give service to its thousands of users, some water must be used for regulatory purposes, but the amount is held to a mintmum and now is considerably less than before construction of Hoover Dam and the All-American Canal, when the high silt content of the River neces­ sitated the use of large a.mounts of water for sluicing. Nothing would be gained by diverting more than actual requirements in an attempt to build up water rights. The District's rights are based upon appropriations made in the 1890's. Under California law, so long as the District uses due diligence - and there has never been any question as to that - in putting to use the water appropriated - its rights relate back to and are measured by the amount of such appropriations and not by the amounts used this year, last year or five years ago.

-27- Neither has the District diverted, nor does it intend to divert water through the All-American Ca.cal solely for developing power at hydroelectric plants in Imperial Valley. The only water going through these plants is that required to meet irrigation and domestic demands within the District. Pilot Knob power plant will discharge water back to Colorado River and is therefore in a different category from the other plants on the Canal, which are in Imperial Valley proper and within the drainage area of Salton Sea. II - DRAINAGE m IMPERIAL VAIJE! Necessity for Drainage

The drainage problem in Imperial Valley is linked closely With problems of Salton Sea and water quality. As in other irrigation projects, the necessity of adequate drainage was not fully appreciated during early development of Imperial Valley. As a consequence, productivity of thousands of acres was seriously affected by high water table and increased soil salinity. Some lands went out of production. Object of Drainage

Most western waters, contain salts which, without proper drainage, affect the productivity of land and eventually make it unfit for a,gricultural use. The main objects of drainage are to maintain the ground water level at a proper depth below land surface and to remove salts from, and prevent their concentration in, the root zone. The problem in Imperial Valley is most difficult. The soil/or great depths is Colorado River silt, highly stratified, in disconnected pockets and lenses, and ranging from sand to colloidal clay. There are no gravel and sand waterbearing strata. Neither is there a "general" underground water table as found under most irrigation projects. In most of the Valley, the water table is ''perched" on relatively impervious strata. Because of these conditions, pumping for drainage is not possible. Construction of Drainage System

The District's drainage system, commenced in the early 20's, now consists of 136o miles of open drains, in depths of 12 or 14 feet for the main drains and 7 or 8 feet for lateral drai.ns. Most of the main drains discharge into Alamo River or New River, which serve as outlets to Salton Sea; a few discharge directly into the Sea. It was early discovered that complete solution depends on drainage of individual farms. Commencing in 1928, some 36oO miles of tile farm drains have been laid. The lines are spaced mostly 200 feet apart a.nd 5 or 6 feet below the surface. Average cost of draining a farm is $50 to $6o an acre, exclusive of engineering, which is furnished Without cost to the landowner by the District or the Soil Conservation Service. Results indicate that effective drainage can be permallently provided on the tightest soils of Imperial Valley.

Salt Bala.nee One measure of the effectiveness of drainage is the amount of salt removed from the project. Continued production requires removal of at least as much salt as is brought in with the irrigation water. The District has records of the tonnage of salt coming into the Valley through the All-American

-28- Canal and from Mexico through the Ala.mo and New Rivers, and the tonnage removed from the Valley to Salton Sea. Until 1949, the amount removed each year was less than that brought in. However, commencing in 1949, there has been a favorable salt balance. As the drainage system is extended the per­ centage of gain should increase. Tons of Salt Tons of Salt Ge.in or Year into I.V. into Salton Sea Loss

1948 2,744,ooo 2,630,000 4.15,; loss 1949 2,659,119 2,Boo,165 5.3o,; gain 1950 2,793,78o 2,931,431 4.93,; gain 1951 3,189,765 3,213,686 0.75,; gain

III - QUALITY OF COLORADO RIVER WATER Areas Served by Lower Colorado River

The water for all purposes in Imperial Valley and Mexicali Valley - domestic, irrigation, and industrial - is supplied from Colorado River. There is no potable underground supply. In Coachella Valley, the underground water is mostly of good quality and, prior to completion of the AJ.1-American Canal, was the sole source of supply. However, it is sufficient for only 12,000 to 15,000 acres, whereas under full development about 100,000 acres will be irrigated. The supply for the additional 85,000 acres will have to be from Colorado River. In addition, the Colorado will supply water to 400,000 acres in other irrigation projects on the lower river in the United States, and over 1,000,000 acre-feet a year for domestic and industrial use on the coastal plain of Southern California.

Salinity of Colorado River Water Prior to control of the River by Hoover Dam, the salt content of the water varied from 150 parts per million during flood season to 1000 parts per million during low flow periods. In droughts, as in 1924 and 1934, the content reached 2000 parts per million during short periods. Storage of flood waters behind Hoover Dam created a gigantic mixing bowl, so now there is little variance in the salt content of the lower river. For several years it has averaged 700 parts per million, or rougbl.y one ton of salt per acre­ foot of' water, a satisfactory quality for irrigation and domestic purposes. No difficulty would be anticipated with water of this quality on·the projects below Hoover Dam.

Future Qual1ty

There is now coming into Lake Mead 12 or 13 million tons of salt annually. It is believed that this tonnage will not change much as develop­ ment in the Upper Basin proceeds, although the amount of water carrying it will be decreased by the additional upstream cons-umption. Substantial changes are likely in the percentages of various chemicals in the water; for example the percentage of sodium as compared to calcium and magnesium.

-29- What will be the effect of these changes on the use of the water for irrigation and potable purposes? Will more water be required per acre of crops? If the water is softened, what will be its effect on plants?

Questions to be Answered These and other questions warrant research and investigation prior to initiation of large-scale consumptive use projects in the Upper Basin. The time to get the answers is now, not after new projects are built. Among the points to be considered are:

(1) Origins of salts in Colorado River at Lee Ferry, and amount contributed by each source.

(2) Effects of increasing transmountain diversions in the Upper Basin.

(3) Relative effects of different consumptive use projects in the Upper Basin.

(4) Future salinity of the river at Lee Ferry and Yuma, assuming the Upper Basin is to consume 7,500,000 acre-feet annua.lly.

(5) Effects of increased salinity on various crops grown on the lower river projects and on the amounts of water required per acre. (6) Possible danger point in salinity for present Lower Basin projects, and corresponding stage of development in the Upper Basin.

(7) Effects of increased salinity of river water on domestic and industrial uses. (8) Practical remedies for dangerous situations should they occur.

IV - CONCLUSION Far too little attention has been given to this question of future quality of water. The answers should be determined now, prior to any large­ scale development on the upper river. If there is real possibility of such developments resulting in damage to the great irrigation and domestic use projects in the Lower Basin, it would seem foolish to "rob Peter to pay Paul." Considering the best interests of the Nation, it would seem unwise to develop one part of the country if by so doing, another part would be seriously hurt economically - especially if the agricultural and industrial productive value of the latter is many times greater than of the former. ***********

-30- TRANS-BASm DIVERSIONS FROM COLORADO RIVER BASIN Avery A. Batson, Director, Region 7, Bureau of Reclamation

Mr. Matthew suggested that I discuss trans-basin diversions of water which are being constructed or are under consideration in my area of jurisdiction. That area includes the Niobrara River Basin in northern Nebraska; the Platte River Basin in Nebraska, Wyoming, and Colorado; and the Kansas River Basin in Kansas, Nebraska, and Colorado, all tributary to the Missouri River; and that portion of the Arkansas River above Ellinwood, Kansas in Kansas and Colorado. Included in my responsibilities is the development of water resources which could be made available for importation into this area.

Trans-basin diversion is not new. We have exampl.es in the West, one prime exampl.e being the All-American Canal.. More than 3 million acre­ feet of water are being diverted through the All-American each year from Colorado River into Imperi al Valley and Coachella Valley. Another trans­ basin diversion fran Lower Colorado River Basin is the Colorado River Aqueduct developed by The Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.

Trans-basin diversion is not new in the Upper Basin eithe~ Exports across the Continental Divide to the Eastern Slope date back to 1880. This oldest diversion was developed for placer mining but bas been used to supply water for irrigation in the Arkansas Valley since 1912. There are 20 such diversions in Colorado '1hich were developed without aid of the Federal Government. Together, they export some 100,000 acre-feet of water annually. Only one exportation is being made in Wyoming. Diversion records are not available, but, the annual amounts are relatively minor. In Southern Colorado, outside of my jurisdiction, seven smaJ.l ditches carry about 4,000 acre-feet annually from San Juan River to the Rio Grande.

A proposed diversion from the San Juan to Chama River is under investigation by the Federal Government. Physically, 264,ooo acre-feet could be transported annually; but decisions have not been reached regarding economic and political aspects, such as water use within the parent basin in relationship to amounts '1hich reasonably could be exported. Ruies for exportation of water from the Colorado River Geographic Ba.sin are set forth in the Colorado River Compact, signed by all Basin States in 1922, and the Boulder Canyon Project Act of 1928. The Compact, promptly ratified by California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming, became effective as to those states in 1929. Arizona ratified in 1944. In essence, this compact allocated the water of the Colorado River between the Upper Ba.sin and the Lower Basin and imposed an obligation upon the States of Colorado, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming not to deplete the flow of the river at Lee Ferry below 75 million acre-feet in any consecutive ten-year period. Al.l areas of the seven states are included within the Colorado River Ba.sin regardless of whether such areas are within the natural basin.

The Upper Colorado River Basin Compact was signed by Wyoming, Utah, Colorado, New Mexico and Arizona in 1948 and approved by Congress in 1949.

-31- It allocated the Upper Basin's share of water among the Upper Basin states and fixed the obligations of the States of the Upper Division to make the Lee Ferry deliveries required by the 1922 Compact .

The Supreme Court decree on the North Platte, the Colorado­ Nebraska Compact on the South Platte, and the Colorado-Kansas Compact on the Arkansas provide protection against demand by states outside the Colorado River Basin, as defined by the 1922 Compact, for water diverted from the Colorado River.

Another set of rules involves intra-state relationships as distin­ guished from inter-state matters. The most significant intra-state considera­ tion is bow much water allocated to the state is to be used within the parent basin and how much may be exported. In Colorado, policy established by the legislature and the State Water Conservation Boa.rd governs these relationships. It provides that adequate allowances be made for present and potential uses within the parent basin in determining the availability of water for export. Lacking similar expression in State law or policy in Wyoming, we have used that rule in Wyoming for planning purposes.

Investigative reports are tested for compliance with these rules before being submitted to the Congress; first in our review of the report and later in the review by the affected states required by the Flood Control Act of 1944. The reports provide for facilities to protect in-basin use as well as plans for operation of proposed developments consistent with the rules. Such provisions are compelling upon the operating agency.

The first report of m:y office containing such provisions became embodied in Senate Document 80, the original report to Congress on the Colorado-Big Thompson Project, and the basis for the first appropriation of construction funds for the project. Although construction began before the Upper Basin Compact became effective, it was considered that the water requirements, together with existing uses were wel l within the amount of Colorado River water that would be available to Colorado. A similar report on the proposed Fryingpan-Arkansas Project now awaits Congressional action.

The highest purpose of trans-basin diversion is to transport water in excess of present and prospective uses within a basin to another basin where needs exceed the water supply and where the satisfaction of such needs is in the best interest of the most beneficial use of the water supply. 'lbearea west of the Continental Divide in Wyoming and Colorado is rich in water re­ sources, but definitely limited, for topographical reasons, in adaptability to intensive agriculture requiring great amounts of water. Industrially, it is richly endowed with many natural resources, but such development is limited because of inaccessibility to mass markets. Diversion requirements for municipal and industrial use may be significant, yet the low rate of con­ sumptive use reduces that significance. Future demands for water in the oil shale industry or in hydrogenation of coal cannot be predicted with precision at this time. New processes being developed reduce the extravagant consumptive use of water required by earlier processes.

On the East Slope is a vast area more susceptible to intensive cultivation. The agricultural potential of the Great Plains in Wyoming and Colorado is limited only by the amount of water available. Much more land

-32- could beccme rich farmlands but the major streains are over-appropriated. During dry years, crops suffer because of the meager supply of water. And so the big question: With such a situation, how best can a state use its available water supply under the established ground rules?

The Colorado-Big Thompson was designed as one answer: To collect and store water available in the headwaters of Colorado River and export it to the parched Eastern Slope. First funds were appropriated in 1937. Colorado River water is stored in Granby Reservoir on the Western Slope, ptm1ped into Shadow Mountain Lake, flows eastward under the Continental Divide through the 13 mile Alva B. Adams tunnel, and from this tunnel through power plants and regulating reservoirs to the distribution system on the East Slope. Regulation at terminal reservoirs assures use of the imported water within the State of Colorado. Distribution is in accordance with allocations made by the Conservancy District as administered by the State Engineer under State law.

The land which can be served with supplemental water totals 700,000 acres. One-third the estimated water supply has been allocated to ditch companies, cities, towns and individual users. Additional applications far exceed the balance available. Allocations will be completed by the time construction has been finished. The hydroelectric output is conducted into an interconnected system that serves southeastern Wyoming, northeastern Colorado, the Panhandle of Nebraska, and REAs and municipalities on the West Slope as far northwest as Oak Creek, Colorado. Some power reaches southern Colorado over Public Service Company of Colorado lines to Salida and government lines to Gunnison. Installed capacity is 175,000 kilowatts, with more than 75 percent classified as firm.

Measures were written into Senate Document 8o to protect West Slope water users. Steps taken to comply include construction of Green Mountain Reservoir to store winter flows of Blue River and satisfy demands on the West Slope while Granby Reservoir is storing. Another protective measure provides for irrigation of meadows adjacent to the river and formerly flood irrigated. To continue their irrigation after the stream flow came under regulation, headings of ditches were extended and new canals and ptm1ping plants installed.

Senate Document 80 provided that the beauty of the area adjacent to the Rocky Mountain National Park be preserved. Most construction scars at higher elevations have been removed and practically all project conduits are covered canals or tunnels, to assure reliable winter operation and to preserve the beauty of the area. The Document provided that Colorado River below Granby to its confluence with the Fraser be maintained as a live stream to protect fishery values. Studies are underway by the Fish and Wildlife Service, the State Game and Fish Department and ourselves to deter­ mine the flows necessary to maintain a live stream.

The Project is over 8o percent complete and parts are in operation. Power is being produced and irrigation water has been delivered in Poudre River and Big Thompson River since 1947, with approximately 42,000 acre-feet in 1952.

-33- The proposed Fryingpan-Arka.nsas Project would import about 70,000 acre-feet of water annua.lly from Fryingpa.n River and other tributaries of Roaring Fork on the West Slope into Arkansas River on the East Slope. A report was submitted to the last Congress, but no hearings were held, Aspen Reservoir on the West Slope would be constructed to supply replacement water. The plan takes into accoi.mt full present and prospective uses of water on the West Slope in Colorado, as worked out with the State and representatives of the areas affected. Included are provisions for by-passes at collection points to preserve fishery values of streams.

The imported and native water would be conducted through canals and powerplants to the terminal plant at Salida, Colorado, where it would be returned to the river for re-regulating at Pueblo Reservoir. This reservoir would regulate the imported water and unappropriated flood flows in the Arkansas River, all desperately needed for supplementary supplies on lands now irrigated and to improve supplies for cities, towns, and industries. The power system would consist of 105,000 kilowatts installed capacity to be integrated into the area's power system. The Fryingpan-Arka.nsas Project was conceived as part of a larger development. Much more water could be benefi­ cially used in the Upper Arkansas to firm the water requirements of lands now irrigated and to provide for development of additional acreage. Substan­ tial quantities pbysically and practically, could be imported. Full agreement on requirements of the West Slope have not been reached and, therefore, the actual a.mount available for importation to the East Slope has not been decided. When present studies are completed, sane determination mJJ.Y be mJJ.de.

The plan for the Fryingpan-Arkansas was submitted in preliminary form to the State of Colorado for review. The Colorado Water Conservation Board organized a Policy and Review Committee to determine state policy, and the report was finally drafted and including the operating principles was approved.

Another development under investigation is the Blue-South Platte Project, to collect water from tributaries of the Blue, Williams and Eagle Rivers and Piney Creek--all tributaries of Colorado River. Objectives would be regulation of West Slope supplies and exportation to the East Slope to supply requirements of Denver and its Metropolitan area, which fear a critical shortage by 196o, and to supplement irrigation supplies south of the Colorado­ Big Thompson Project and possibly irrigate lands now dry farmed. Depletions of West Slope rivers by tllls development have been taken into consideration, and plans will be devised to meet present and potential West Slope requirements including municipal and industrial. Depletions of Blue River by the Blue-South Platte development would affect operation of Green Mountain Reservoir of the Big Thompson Project. Alternate means of fulfilling the obligations of that reservoir are provided in the Blue-South Platte plan. To prove their effec­ tiveness, legal interpretations of Senate Document 8o must be mJJ.de, and water rights of the Big Thompson Project finally adjudicated. These procedures are in process.

In Wyoming we have investigated the South Pass Project, for diver­ sion from Big Sandy Creek, a tributary of the Green River, into &.reetwater River, tributary of the North Platte. Another possibility is diversion from Elk Creek or the Little Snake River, tributaries of the Y~a, into the North Platte. We have not yet found a feasible plan for such develop­ ments. One difficulty is that potentials for in-basin development are

-34- relatively high on the tributaries of Green and Yampa rivers. Any excess water occurs at lower elevations where practicability of colJ.ection and exportation is less. However, investigations for using the wat er allocat ed to Wyoming ,..ithin that state are continuing.

These developments, ,..1th all the ground rules by which they must be controlJ.ed, are not simple. Conversely, the rules have simplified serious problems which ,..ould have prevented many possibilities from be­ coming realities. We have gained valuable experience on the Colorado-Big Thompson Project. Other problems remain to be solved--physical, economic, legal and political. Upon success or failure in resolving them, depends the economy of a region which has a sizeable contribution to make t o the economic strength of the nation. Only through patiently and persistently seeking solution of these problems may we hope to achieve optimum develop­ ment of Western ,..ater resources.

INCREASING RIVER FLOWS THROUGH WEATHER MODil'ICATIONS Irving P. Krick, President, Water Resources Development Corp. (Given with illustrative photographic slides)

Of particular interest to ,..ater users in the Colorado River Basin are ,..eather modification operations to increase snow pack. The Water Resources Development Corporation conducted such operations during the snow pack season of 1951-52 in the Upper Colorado and Upper Rio Grande drainage basins. It is believed that these operations materially improved surface and ground,..ater run-off.

It is generally acknowledged that quantitative evaluation of snow pack due to cloud seeding is difficult or impossible. Nevertheless, com­ parison of last ,..inter•s results ..1th those of previous winters brings to light a number of points that must be considered significant. Knowledge of these factors is essential to open-minded Judgment of possible benefits from cloud seeding.

For a study of the relationship of snow pack to ensuing stream flow, there was selected a representative network of 24 snow courses in the project area for which data were available for 1943-1952 inclusive. Snow depth and water content at the beginning of April were tabulated for each course and the average water content was calculated for each year 1943-1952 as a water content index. The data show that the April water content in 1952 was not only welJ. above average for 23 of the 24 courses, but was the highest since 1936, when records were started, at 15 of the 24 courses.

Stream flow data for the April to September seasons, 1943-1952, were tabulated for Colorado River at Cisco and at Lee's Ferry, and for the Rio Grande at Otawi. At all 3 stations the flow in the 1952 season was the highest for the 10-year period. Moreover, although there need be no direct correlation between water content and stream flow oving to the many variables that affect flov other than snow melt, the two phenomena in this study show a high degree of correlation with a maximum for both water content index and stream flow in 1952.

-35- Study was also made of weather records of the general area to determine frequency and distribution of weather processes and their associ­ ated rainfall patterns, and to evaluate cloud seeding potentials during winter months. Also, total precipitation for each month from November 1951 to March 1952, was compared with long-t1me normal precipitation. Large areas of Utah, Colorado, and New Mexico received more than normal precipita­ tion in each month except February. During February, storms from the Pacific moved eastward across the United States so far north that opportunities for seeding e i ther drainage basin were fe•.r. For Southern Utah the analysis of the program from its inception on April 1, 1951 through January 1952 indica­ ted 41i increase over natural precipitation. The same general characteristics were observed in all the snow pack Operations of the Water Resources DevelOpment Corporation. This was a record winter for precipitation, not only in the States considered, but throughout the West. In case this should lead one to belittle the part played by cloud seeding, a short account is included of what happened in Colorado in the winter 1950-1951, when a few silver iodide generators were operating in the Upper Arkansas drainage basin. Study of snow conditions in this area on December 15, 1950, shows that the ratio of precipitation within the target area to precipitation on adjacent region.a was as high as 10 to 1. It seems reasonable that a portion of this target area precipitation resulted from cloud seeding operations. Seven of the ten snow courses in or near the area gave results higher than any since 1936. They were topped only by the 1952 values, when more extensive operations were undertaken. The result in 1951 was more remarkable in that the area south and west was extremely dry, in sharp contrast to the target area.

These are the facts. Conclusive proof of the beneficial effects of cloud seeding will only be available when operations have been running long enough for it to be self-evident that the precipitation pattern for an area has been changed. Meantime, one must surely conclude that at 1.east the first step has been taken in that direction. Bear in mind that we are not changing any basic principles; we are still obeying the laws of conservation of mass and energy. I suggest that you think it over and see if we don't have scme­ thing here that your association could look into seriously. *********** THE IVANHOE CASE AND TllE 9(e) CONrRACT Harry W. Horton, Attorney at Law

A proceeding was instituted by the Ivanhoe Irrigation District in the Superior Court of Tul.are County, California to val.id.ate a contract between that District and the United States. The contract bad to do with two matters: (1), a supply of water to the District and (2), construction by the United

States for the District of a distribution system for about 101 000 acres of land in the District.

Courtney McCracken, an owner of more than 320 acres of 1.and and a single man, contested the validation of the contract, and after an extended hearing the Court held the contract to be invalid.

-36- Background for this suit is in the 1939 Reclamation Act. The Bureau of Reclamation has cla:!Jned that section 9(e) of that Act justifies a contract which is at variance with the general concept of reclamation contracts, in that the 9(e) contract is not a repayment contract and does not provide for a permanent water right. It makes no provision for credit­ ing the money paid in except the a.mounts paid on the cost of the local distribution system.

The Ivanhoe Case revolved around the following propositions:

1. That the landowners within the District, and likewise the District, were enti tled to a contract which would provide for a permanent water right appurtenant to the land, subject only to continued beneficial use of the water and the meeting of the obligations to the United States. Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902 specifically provides for just this.

2. That the District and landowners should be given specific credit upon such costs of the major works as are to be repaid by agriculture. The contract in question provided for payment of $3.50 an acre-foot for Class A water and $1.50 an acre-foot for Class B water, but it did not specify how these a.mounts were to be credited in favor of the District and landowners, nor 'Where and how they were to be used by the United States Government.

3, That acreage limitation provi sions in the proposed contract were arbitrary, unreasonable, unworkable, and therefore invalid; that pro­ visions requiring the sale of the excess land would mean taking property without due process; and that the provi sion for refusal to deliver water to excess land, notwithstanding that those lands would be assessable whether getting water or not, was invalid. There were provisions in the proposed contract that water could not be delivered to anyone owning more than 160 acres of land if single or more than 320 acres of land if married until and unless be bad given the United States a recordable contract agreeing to sell all. his excess land at a value fixed by appraisers appointed by the United States and the District. Notwithstanding this provision the proposed contract would also provide that all. lands within the District would be assessed for and be liable for payments to the United States under the contract.

4. That the contract was invalid a l so because it would incorporate not only present :rules and regulations of the Secretary of Interior and present Federal laws, but also future :rules and regulations and Federal legislation without regard to what they might cover or provide, thus making such future :rules and regulations and new acts of Congress parts of the con­ tract by virtue of the specific language of the contract and certain provisions of California law.

The Court held that with respect to each and all of the foregoing propositions, the contract as written and as interpreted in written documents and test1mony of the Reclamation Bureau, was illegal.

Reclamation Bureau officials claim that the proposed contract was authorized under Section 9(e) of the Reclamation Act of 1939. However, in neither the camn.ittee hearings nor the debates upon the Floor of the Congress relative to this Act was there any disclosure that the Act of 1939 would in

-37- any way change the basic principle of the 40-year repayment contract. Not only by ora.l testimony but by submission of written documents it was spe­ cifically represented that there would be no change in the Reclamation Law and that the principle of the 4o-year repayment contract would still remain the law in the 1939 Act. However, after the Act was passed, someone conceived the idea of reading into Section 9(e) various principles and propositions that were never heard of or thought of at the ti.me the Act was passed. Bureau officials specifically made the following claims with respect to the pro­ posed Ivanhoe 9(e) contract: 1. That a water right under this contract was not permanent but only temporary and not appurtenant to the land, and that under the provisions of Section 9(e) a permanent and appurtenant water right could not be given by the United States.

2. That the Bureau was under no obligation to give any specific credit for the irrigation water revenues; that such revenues could be collected by the United States indefinitely, even after the repayable costs of the major project works were fully paid; and that such monies could be used by the Bureau to build other units of this project or other projects elsewhere; that in other words, the Goverrnnent was not obligated to treat the contract as one for repayment to the United States over a 4o or a 50-year period. 3. That provisions of the several reclama.tion acts from 1902 to and including 1939, required that any contract between the United States and an irrigation district contain acreage limitations precisely as proposed in the Ivanhoe contract; and that the general concept of limiting the use of land to a family-size farm and preventing speculation was basic and required. (There is not one word concerning acreage limitations in the Reclama.tion Act of 1939. Resort had to be made to other Acts, where it is found that the Secretary not only could apply acreage limitations restricting the land any one person could own to a so-called family-size farm vhich might be as small as ten acres, but a.lso he could even apply residence and occupation require­ ments. Orally the Bureau denied any intention of reducing the family- size farm below 16o acres, but its printed documents do not coincide with this position). 4. That the various reclamation laws give the Secretary the arbitrary right to make rules and regulations which become part of a con­ tract, regardless of the nature and extent of those rules and regulations. (There are many contracts, however, which do not contain the provision that the Secretary may make rules and regulations not inconsistent with the rights of the parties and the terms of the contract. Such a provision is not con­ tained in the so-called 9(e) contracts.)

In considering any 9(e) contract, the water users should consider the four major points outlined above as well. as many other points "'1lich may seem minor in nature but which might be major in effect.

-38- The Ivanhoe case having been decided in the SUperior Court will probably go up on Appeal, and these various points will fina.lly be decided by the SUpreme Court of California and possibly by the United States Supreme Court. *********** SrruATION ALONG LOWER COLORADO RIVER Carl P. Vetter, Chief, Office of River Control, Bureau of ReclaJna,tion

Dams constructed on Colorado River below Lee Ferry have seriously upset the regimen of the river downstream. The action of the river in some respects can be likened to the action of littoral currents along Southern California beaches. Since those beaches are at angles with the direction of prevailing winds, the resultant marine currents travel along the beach line. Large volumes of sand are thus moved downwind. In order to control this erosion and protect the beaches groins are built perpendicular to the beach line. Sand builds up on the upwind sides of the groins, and moves out from the downwind sides.

Similarly, at the Palo Verde weir on the Colorado River near Blythe, a wedge of silt has been deposited upstream and the channel has been exca­ vated downstream. The question then arises as to what would happen it' the weir, a temporary structure, were removed. Drainage and channel conditions upstream would undoubtedly be iltlproved, but what would happen downstream? Some think the silt now upstream from the weir might be washed downstream as far as Imperial Dam, where it would cause trouble.

It is impossible to predict accurately what would happen, but on the basis of inf'ormation gathered by the Office of River Control one can make an intelligent guess. Our records show that 1,300,000 cubic yards of material have been deposited in the channel above Palo Verde Weir since the date of construction. Excavation of the channel below the weir has been approximately 33,000,000 cubic yards, mostly induced by the dredged cut at the Palo Verde Drain. The deposition upstream extends for five or six m1les above the weir whereas the excavation downstream extends about 66 miles. In the first five or six miles below the weir the excavation is about 2,6oo,ooo C\Jbic yards, or about twice the deposition upstream. In my opinion removal of the Palo Verde Weir would cause no problem since there is 30 times as much room for deposition downstream as there is sediment above the weir. The sediment would fill the hold below the weir and would not reach Imperial Dam.

Operation of the river to conform with schedules of water and power delivery offers increasing problems, particularly in delivery of water to Mexico in accordance with terms of the Water Treaty. Mexico is at the end of the river. Mexican officials order water by weekly schedules. In order to meet these schedules, the Office of River Control has to anticipate deliveries as much as five days. Furthermore, because of large losses in the river channel, releases from the reservoirs to meet Mexican requirements must exceed the quantities ordered by considerable a.mounts which also vary with weather conditions. Evapotranspiration along the river fluctuates widely depending upon temperature, air movement and humidity. The Recl.Bma.­ tion Bureau receives from the Weather Bureau five-day forecasts of such

-39- conditions. In spite of anticipation of deliveries and attention to weather forecasts, it is necessary to release from the reservoirs 200 to 300 cubic feet per second more than the Mexican demand in order to insure delivery of the requested quantities at Morelos Diversion Dam in the limitrophe section of the river. It is hoped that an agreement can be reached with Mexican officials so that deficiency in delivery of water on one day could be made up another day. This could simplify to some extent the operation of facilities to meet Mexican requirements. *********** "THE FALLBROOK s:rORY"

(Through the courtesy of the Los Angeles TIMES, the audience was shown the color motion picture "The Fallbrook Story" dealing with the suit brought by the Federal government against local water users over the water rights in the Santa Margarita River basin, California.)

***********

BUSINESS SESSION

Mr. Arvin B. Shaw, Jr., chairman of the Resolutions Committee, presented and moved adoption of five resolutions. Each was seconded from the floor and unanimously adopted. The resolutions follow:

RESOLUTION NO. 1 - RESOLVED by the Colorado River Water Users Association that said Association reaffirms its recommendation that national water policy be defined and clarified and to that end said Association commends to the attention of the Congress the report of the Water Policy Committee re­ cently approved by the National Reclamation Association as in general tending toward correct concepts as to Federal-State relationships in the field of water resource development.

RESOLUTION NO. 2 - RESOLVED, That the Colorado River Water Users Association reaffirms the policy repeatedly declared by its previous resolu­ tions condemning the creation of Federal Valley Authorities under any guise.

RESOLUTION NO. 3 - RESOLVED, That the Colorado River Water Users Association favors and urges the adoption by the Congress of legislation directing that all federal officers shall, in carrying out functions relating to water development, conform to state water laws in like manner as the Secretary of the Interior is directed by Section 8 of the Reclamation Act of 1902.

RESOLIJrION NO. 4 - RESOLVED, That the Colorado River Water Users Association urges the United States and the States of the Colorado River Basin to coll.a.borate toward more complete determination of the water supply

-40- of the Colorado River System by establishment of a more comprehensive system of stream gages which are essential to the carrying out of the Colorado River Compact.

RESOLurION NO. 5 - WHEREAS, this Ninth Annual Conference of the Colorado River Water Users Association has been made enjoyable and has offered an interesting and instructive program, and

WHEREAS, the success of the conference has been due to the courtesy and cooperation of all those participating in the arrangements made and the program presented;

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Association does hereby extend sincere thanks to those who participated in the program, to: Honorable Cliff Jones, Lieutenant Governor of Nevada, to C. D. Baker, Mayor of the City of Las Vegas, to the Thunderbird Hotel, to the members of the Colorado River Commission of the State of Nevada, to the Las Vegas Chamber of Commerce, to the press, radio and to all others whose courteous interest contributed to the success of this meeting. Mr. Victor I. Corbell, chairman of the Nominating Committee, recom­ mended for the Committee that the 1952 officers be requested to continue in their respective capacities for the calendar year 1953. Mr. C. A. Anderson moved that the names of the incumbent officers be placed in nomination and that the nominations be closed. The motion was carried and the following officers were re-elected for 1953 .

A. J. Shaver, President Evan T. Hewes, Vice President Raymond Matthew, Secretary-Treasurer Representatives of the Basin States were canvassed as to their choice for their respective state directors during 1953. The following state directors were re-elected; Arizona . . C. A. Anderson, Coolidge Victor r. Corbell, Tempe California ...... •..• Evan T. Hewes, El Centro Raymond Matthew, Los Angeles Nevada ...... •..... Alfred Merritt Smith, Carson City J, H. Buehler, Pioche

Utah Fisher Harris, Salt Lake City Wayne Wilson, La Verkin Wyoming ...... • Perry w. Jenkins, Big Piney Robert w. Wilson, Cora Since no Colorado and New Mexico representatives were present, directors from the other states will communicate with members of the Associa­ tion in those two states as to their choice of directors.

-41- The Auditing Committee chairman, Mr Hampton C. Godbe, reported that the accounts and financial statement of the Secretary-Treasurer were in order and recommended their approval, which was unanimously given. The financial statement fol lows:

RECORDS of Evan T. Hewes to January 15, 1952 Balance on hand December 1, 1951 $1,433.96

RECEIPrS, December 1, 1951 to January 15, 1952 - DUES $331.00

EXPENDITURES, December 1, 1951 to January 15, 1952 Hotel Thunderbird - Luncheons $ 34.oo Hotel Thunderbird - Refreshments 134.50 Normandy Boys - Music 25.00 Hampton C. Godbe - Lunches 4.00

Hooven Letter Co. - Printing of Proceedings of Seventh Conference 225.11 Royal Pri nting Co . - Programs for Las Vegas meeting 35.19 Postmaster - Stamps 1.50 A. J. Shaver - Expenses in connection with Las Vegas meeting 52.75 Evan T. Hewes - Spray for Chauncey Sandberg funeral 10.05 • El eanor Case - stenographic work 28.00 Total Expenditures $550.10

Balance on hand January 15, 1952 $1,214.86

-42- Financial Report December 3, 1952

TRANSFERRED TO RAYMOND MATTHEW from Evan T. Hewes by check deposited February 25, 1952 $1,214.86 RECEIPrS - DUES 959.00 $2,173.86 EXPENDITURES from Feb. 25, 1952 to December 3, 1952 Utah Bank Note Co. 3/17/52 Envelopes & Letterhead.s 53.88 Hooven Letter Co. 6/27/52 8th Annual Proceedings 264.44 Royal Printing Co. 7/27 /52 Labels & manilla envelopes 16.04 Hooven Letter Co. 9/18/52 Notice of 9th Annual Meeting 22 .4o Royal Printing Co. 10/9/52 Envel opes 11.91 Postmaster 11/17/52 Stamps 26.14 Postmaster 12/3/52 Stamps 10.50 Telephone Calls Placed by Secretary-Treasurer 51.21 Total Expenditures $ 456.52 Balance on hand December 3, 1952 $1,717 .34

The mailing list was revised in accordance with the suggestions of the directors and officers.

Statements for 1952 dues were mailed to 212 names appearing on the list, and to 20 organizations. Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Meeting were mailed to those who were not present at the Eighth Annual Meeting and did not receive their copies at that ti.me. Proceedings of the Eighth Annual Meeting were mailed to the entire list, the 20 organizations, and to others requesting copies. Proceedings for both annual meet­ ings were mailed to the governors, attorneys general and state engineers of the seven Basin States. Raymond Matthew Secretary-Treasurer -43- Mr. Perry Jenkins suggested the appointment of special committees to make investigations of water projects throughout the Colorado River Basin and report to the Association at its annual meetings. Mr . Snow pointed out that such procedure would involve additional expense. Mr. Shaw, Mr. Shaver, and Mr. Godbe expressed the belief that such a proposal if carried out, might lead t o friction and controversy among the membership and that it would be preferable for each state to study its own projects and inform the Association of its views, so that the Association would not be placed in a position of endorsing opposing specific projects.

Mr. Shaw suggested that Mr. Jenkins' objective, namely, to exchange information and become familiar with problems in other states, could per­ haps be achieved by incorporating in the annual meetings a general presenta­ tion by each state as to its own particular projects, objectives and desires. Mr. Godbe pointed out that the Association is an organization of water users joined together for protection of their rights and f or the exchange of information so that each can judge the effects of proposals upon his rights but that the Association was not organized for the purpose of planning projects or formulating programs.

Mr. Matthew pointed out that committees had been created in the past t o make certain studies but that the results were poor because of the practical difficulties of getting the committee members together. He also emphasized that the primary objective of the Association is to provide oppor­ tunity for exchange of information and ideas on basic subjects of vital interest to actual water users. He suggested that the annual meetings could include more round-table discussion of projects and of their effects upon the rights of the water users and their respective states.

It was agreed that the matter of setting up a committee to study projects and report thereon should be referred to the Board of Directors for further consideration with the understanding that the Board should also con­ sider the advisability of appointing legal and legislative committees. There­ upon the meeting was adjourned.

Raymond Matthew Secretary-Treasurer

-44-