|
<br />OOJ186
<br />
<br />-5-
<br />
<br />Those States, by their governors or other reprecentatives, met to-
<br />gether at Sa It lake City, Utah, in January, 1919, Governor Spry, of
<br />Utah, now Commissioner of the General Land Office, presiding.
<br />
<br />"
<br />
<br />""
<br />
<br />With your permission, I sh~11 later include in the record the re-
<br />solutions hM.t Were adopted at that meeting, But I may briefly state
<br />that, n.fter a thorough consideration of the differont phases of the
<br />general subjeot of the benefioial use of t he waters of the Colorado
<br />River and all of its tributary streams, resolutions were prepared a.nd
<br />adopted, making certain reO onnnendoti ons, particularly to the effect
<br />that the drainage area should be developed prim',"ily at the source,
<br />and that the development should proceed from the souroe downward, in
<br />order that ths greatest use might be made of the water supply,
<br />
<br />I might pause here to remark tha.t the history of irrigation in ths
<br />West has demonstrated that the application of water to lands does not
<br />consume the water, seve in part. It is not like a refinery use, for
<br />example, or uses v:here the water is diverted from the steam and passes
<br />off to the air, in the i'om! of steam 01' vapor; but the water, in 1l1rge
<br />part, sinks into the soil in the same manner th,"t weter from rainfall
<br />sinks into t'he soil in ths humid regions, and passing down through
<br />the voids in the soil, gradually forms an underground res rvoir from
<br />which the water returns gradually to the stroam in tho form of springs,
<br />forming, in turn, rivulets, brooks, and cre"jos that never existed before
<br />the irrigation works were ccnstructed.
<br />
<br />l1R. I1ICH;;;NER. Well, that statement is 1arr:;ely theoretical. You
<br />would not say aa a practice 1 1'1an liYinr:; out in that arid region thnt
<br />much of the water diverted for the purpose of irrigation reaohes these
<br />underground lakes and streams, would you?
<br />
<br />NR. CfRPENT:-:R. Oh, yes.
<br />
<br />l1R. MICH31nR. You would?
<br />
<br />,
<br />
<br />~m. CPRPENTZR. Yes. The peroentage of return, so far as our
<br />investic;at'.ons have thus far gone, varies according to the soil and
<br />topography of the country end too partiou1ar stripe of the strata un-
<br />derneath, In other words, the soil is mO',-e or less stratified vlith
<br />rock, Ilnd the dip of the rock, or too qualit:i 00 the subsoil has a
<br />great deal to do v;ith the amount of water that returns back to the
<br />stream. Investigations show thQt the return runs from 20 percent up
<br />to as high as 60 percent, and scrneti11lOs more, of the woters taken a
<br />consider8.b1e distance fran the stream. \-Ihere the water WaS ap"lied
<br />immediately adjacent to the stream, along the river bottcrn lands, where
<br />the lAnds are underlaid with grain strGta, the return is much in excess
<br />of that; che only water that is lost is that which is lost by evapo-
<br />ration in the short ti:ne the water is exposed at the surfrce and thrcugh
<br />
<br />,
<br />
|