LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN HEARINGS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES A SIXTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION ON H. R. 2903 By Mr. SWING A BILL TO PROVIDE FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT TC425 C6A 3 1924 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION SIXTY-EIGHTH CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION ADDISON T. SMITH, Idaho, Chairman NICHOLAS J. SINNOTT, Oregon. EDWARD C. LITTLE, Kansas. ELMER O. LEATHERWOOD, Utah. ROBERT G. SIMMONS, Nebraska. SCOTT LEAVITT, Montana. CHARLES E. WINTER, Wyoming. M. C. GARBER, Oklahoma. GERTRUDE 1. BRANDON, Clerk II LIBRARY OF CONGRESS AUG 7 1924 DOCUMENTS DIVISION PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE LOWER COLORADO RIVER BASIN COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION AND RECLAMATION, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, March 25, 1924. The committee met at 10 a. m., Hon. Addison T. Smith (chairman) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. We will resume consideration of the Swing-Johnson bill. Mr. Swing wishes to make a statement. Mr. SWING. On Saturday, in the Washington Star, and on Sunday, in the Washington Post, appeared a news article referring to an engineering report which had been filed with the Secretary of the Interior on what both of these newspaper reports termed the "AllAmerican canal," declaring that it was infeasible and not worthy of serious consideration. The newspaper reports incorrectly referred to the engineering report and recommendation as being a report on the all-American canal. It is not a report on the all-American canal and has nothing to do with the all-American canal, as the report referred to in these two newspapers was a report regarding a proposed high-line canal in Arizona. The all-American canal is entirely in California, and on it no recent report has been made. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that that report be made a part of the record, and I now offer it for that purpose. Mr. RAKER. What is it a report of the Department of the Interior? Mr. SWING. It is a report of the engineers to the Secretary of the Interior. Mr. LEAVITT. That is the report on the one in Arizona? Mr. SWING. Yes. It is dated March 20, 1924, and it was incorrectly referred to in the newspaper accounts as being a report on the all-American canal. (The report referred to is as follows:) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, Hon. HUBERT WORK, Secretary of the Interior. SIR: In accordance with your request, the committee of engineers appointed by you to consider the problems of the Colorado River has the honor to submit the following report on the canal project set forth in the report of G. W. Sturtevant and E. L. Stam, dated September 18, 1923. This project is a proposal to divert water from the Colorado River at or near Spencer Canyon for the irrigation of 3,500,000 acres of land in southwestern Arizona. The canal with an intake elevation of 2,000 feet would be constructed down the canyon to a point a few miles above Grand Wash, thence by alternating tunnels and open channels it would extend in a southwesterly direction across Grapevine Creek, Hualpai Wash, and Detrital or Squaw Wash and the intervening mountain ranges to the western slope of the Black Moun815 tains about 5 miles east of the old Eldorado Ferry; thence down the west slope and around the southern extremity of the Black Mountains crossing the Santa Fe Railroad about 3 miles south of Yucca station; then down the east side of Sacramento Valley and through a long tunnel to the Williams River Valley at the head of Mohave Creek; thence up the Williams Valley crossing Big Sandy and Santa Maria Rivers about 10 miles above their junction; thence in a southwesterly direction across Dato Creek and Bullard Wash, under a low divide into Butler Valley and down the west slope of Harcura Mountains to a crossing of the Santa Fe Railroad about 3 miles east of Vicksburg station. Here the main body of irrigable land would begin and the first main lateral would branch off. Thence the main canal would extend eastward through comparatively level country across the Hassayampa and Agua Fria Valleys, through Paradise Valley to a siphon crossing of Salt River at Granite Reef Dam, the canal level being 157 feet above the dam crest, then southeasterly to a crossing of the Gila River about 7 miles below Florence, then southwesterly to Casa Grande and westerly to a point 8 miles southwest of Maricopa, the elevation at this point being approximately 1,300 feet. The length of this canal is given by the promoters as approximately 548 miles but measurements following the course outlined, on the best contour maps available, give 360 miles to Santa Maria crossing, 420 miles to Vicksburg, 555 to Granite Reef Dam, and 645 to the end. If the canal were actually located it is safe to say that it would be even longer and possibly over 800 miles long. It is our belief that the average length water would have to travel from diversion to land would hardly be less than 700 miles. The irrigable are cars to include all the lands that can be reached from this canal. It is known that a portion of this area, particularly in the lower Gila Valley below Sentinal Butte, is unsuited to irrigation, and there are also about 300,000 acres now irrigated from other sources which seem to be included. However, it is impossible, from information furnished by the promoters of this plan, or any other data at present available, to determine even approximately the area of lands which could be properly classed as irrigable, and we have grave doubts that so large a body of irrigable land exists under this proposed canal. Land in this locality requires for successful irrigation at least 3 acre-feet per acre delivered. Considering the great length of this canal system, even though all the main canals are concrete lined, loss from seepage and evaporation would certainly amount to 25 per cent to 40 per cent. Taking the smaller amount, it will be necessary to divert 4 acre-feet for each acre of land, or 14,000,000 acre-feet for the season. The maximum use of water in irrigation in this section occurs in July and averages about 13 per cent of the total for the year. This demand will require a canal with a capacity of 30,000 secondfeet. The first 35 or 40 miles of the canal would be located in shale along precipitous cliffs and narrow benches within the canyon. Considering the well-known treacherous character of shale when saturated with water, we think it would be necessary to place the entire canyon section of the canal in tunnel. Further on the main canal would traverse a great deal of country with steep slopes and so irregular that the construction of a surface canal of the necessary capacity would be exceedingly expensive and might be infeasible. Throughout its length the main canal would cross thousands of watercourses varying from small gullies to deep wide canyons. This region is characterized by local storms of very violent character and at each drainage crossing adequate provision must be made for safely carrying storm waters across the canal. This again would add to the expense of the undertaking. Messrs. Sturtevant and Stam state that the total length of tunnels will not exceed 27 miles. Our estimate is over 80 miles, the tunnel from Sacramento Valley into Williams River Valley being alone as long as their total. The low-water level at Spencer Canyon as determined in the survey made by the Geological Survey during the past summer is 1,112 feet. It will therefore be necessary to construct a dam for diversion about 900 feet high above low-water level. It is not known how far below water level satisfactory foundations can be found. With our present knowledge of the principles of dam design it is questionable whether a dam from 900 to 1,000 feet high, developing stresses within ordinary allowable limits, is practicable or economically feasible. It is known that the upper 200 feet of this dam would have shale abutments which probably would not be found permissible in a dam of this character. There is still to be considered a difficulty which is perhaps the most serious of all, the operation of a canal system 700 miles long with 500 miles of main canal in rough mountainous country. The difficulties of handling a river with three times the low-water flow of the Colorado River along canyon walls, rough lava mountain slopes, and across wide detrital washes for 500 miles are hard to visualize and one break in this canal would mean the shutting off of water to this entire area for a period which would ruin crops. A storage and regulating reservoir on the canal line near the irrigable area of sufficient capacity to tide over such an emergency or indeed to meet the ordinary requirements in operating so huge a system, seems to be unavailable and no mention of such a necessary adjunct to the system has been made by the promoters. Messrs. Sturtevant and Stam state that the construction cost of their project, including dam, high-line canal, and lateral canals will be $290,000,000. It is believed that the actual construction cost of such a project, if indeed it is feasible at all, would far exceed this estimate. We consider that this project is inadvisable and is not worthy of serious consideration. SPENCER COSBY, Corps of Engineers, United States Army. E. B. DERLER, Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation. Chief Engineer, Federal Power Commission. Chief Land Classification Branch, Geological Survey. F. E. WEYMOUTH, Chief Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation. WALKER R. YOUNG. Engineer, Bureau of Reclamation. The CHAIRMAN. A few days ago I received from the Secretary of the Interior a letter, dated March 17, 1924, commenting upon the proposed improvement of the Colorado River Basin and transmitting to the committee reports, in eight volumes, in manuscript form, with a great many maps and photographs, one of which is the report of the Reclamation Bureau. The Secretary also submitted the report of the engineers, six in number, appointed by the Secretary to consider the problems of the Colorado River, which report, together with the letter from the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting all of the reports, will be made a part of the record. There are also two separate reports of engineers, one by Col. William Kelly, chief engineer, Federal Power Commission, and one by Mr. Herman Stabler, of the Geological Survey, which will also be made part of the record. The eight volumes referred to are too voluminous to have printed at this time. It will probably take several months to have the maps lithographed, but they are here and available for reference by the committee. Mr. RAKER. Mr. Chairman, as I understand, simply the letter and report of the six engineers are to be printed in the record? The CHAIRMAN. Yes; they are to go into the record, also the memorandum by Herman Stabler. With regard to printing these eight volumes, that is a matter that we will have to take up later. Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Chairman, I suggest that before any action is taken with respect to the printing of these eight volumes an estimate be obtained from the Public Printer of the probable cost of printing and of the time that it will take to make the necessary cuts to illustrate the report, so that we may have available an accurate understanding as to what will be the total cost of this work. |