WSP05098 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

!J':o .... 00 -' ,. ~. Selecting a Site Reclamation engineers, primarily concerned with controlling the lower river. concentrated their studies on the lower basin aher 1919. Their intensified investigations. including geologic and topographic surveys, revealed that Black Canyon was superior to Boulder Canyon in several respects: the depth to bedrock was less ill Black Canyon: the geologic structure was better; and a dam of lesser height would give lhe same reservoir capacity. From 1920 to 1923. men lived in Black Canyon, drilling for rock samples. The rock had to provide an unques- tionably sOllnd foundation~it was going to SUPfX)11 the highest dam the world had ever seen. The engineering problems that would have to be overcome before this dam could be built were formidable. Even nature seemed to conspire against those pioneers of river control. Summer temperatures of 1250 F on the canyon Hoar, cloudbursts, high winds, and sud- den floods battered the surveyors, but the work moved steadily ahead. While investigations for a suitable dam- site were underway, similar investigations were being conducted to find a route in southern Calif(}Jnia for a canal to carry waleI' from the Colorado Rivet to the Im- perial Valley-an "All American" canal. In 1918. the United States Department of the Interior and the Imperial Irrigation District, successor to the California Development Company, entered into an agreement regarding investigations, surveys, and cost estimates for the con- struction of such a canal. The surveys were to follow a general plan agreed upon by the All-American Canal Board, which consisted of one representative each from the Federal Government, rhe Im- perial Irrigation District, and the Univer- sity of Calit()rnia. The board's report, submitted in 1919, recommended that the Federal Govern- ment construct an all-American canal and large storage dams on the Colorado River. 14 The first bill introduced in Congress for constructing this canal-often spoken of as the first Kettner bill-occurred about the time the All-American Canal Board submitted its repM. The bill never came to a vote, however, because Con- gress was not satisfied with the available data. The Kinkaid Act, which authorized and directed the SecretaJY of the Interior to examine and report on the condition and possible irrigation development of Im- perial Valley, was passed in May 1920. Approximately half the cost of this ex- amination was to be paid by the United States, the other half by local interests. In 1921, Arthur P. Davis, Director of Reclamation, repOlted the results of the Colorado River investigations to Secretary of the Interior Albcrt B. Fall. In Feb- ruary 1922, the "Fall-Davis Report," recommending that the Federal Govern- ment construct an All-American Canal and a high dam at or near Boulder Can~ yon on the Colorado River, was sent to the United States Senate. In 1924, Reclamation's chief engineer, FE Weymouth, submitted eight volumes of precise data to the Secretary. This "Weymouth RepOlt," which represented 2 additional years of work under the Kinkaid Act, emphasized the feasibility of a dam at Boulder or Black Canyon. In March 1928, the Senate Committee on Irrigation and Reclamation agreed that "The overwhelming weight of opinion t~1Vors the Boulder or Black Canyon site. . . natural conditions at these sites are extremely favorable for the construction of a great dam at a minimum cost." A board of consulting engineers also re- viewed the two lower basin sites. This board agreed with the Bureau of Recla- mation that Black Canyon was the better choice. Thus, the site of the projected dam was settled. However, engineering was only one phase of the problem. Another phase-the legislative-also had to be solved. Rights to Water The most difficult legislative aspect con- cerned the equitable division of the Col- orado's waters. The people living in the basin depended on this water-wherever they lived; their right to use Colorado River water was far more valuable to them than their title to the land. Because of the laws governing rights to water. the prospect of a large dam in the lower Colorado River Basin caused an understandable apprehension on the part of Basin States other than California. The basic doctrine of water law recognized in all the Basin States except California was that of prior appropriation and use. In other words, the person or agency meeting the required preliminary legal formalities and first appropriating water for beneficial use had first right to the water. California had a dual system of water rights. In addition to appropriation rights, the State also recognized riparian rights- the right of a landowner on the bank of a stream to use the water flowing past his propel1y. Other Basin States had abolished the riparian doctrine. With construction of a large dam, California would be able to beneficially use a large amount of Colorado River water. The State seemed to have the financial resources and, obviously, the in- clination, to proceed with a large irriga- tion development. There would not be enough water for all potential developments in the basin, however. Under the appropriation doc- trine, what was to prevent Califomia from getting the lion's share of the Col- orado's flow by being first with water development? All the States iuvolved could see, theoretically, the advantage of a great dam in the lower basin. But, in all cases, they were concerned about its effect on their individual fortunes. They were haunted by the vision of their water leaving their border, to be used by a State whose better fortunes enabled it to make first use of the water.