The Coconino sun., 1922-08-11

CT market? Is it the Los Angeles power market or the Arizona power market? Also it is not necessary to build power plant at Glen Canyon as the Diamond Creek plant at Dia- mond canyon is to be built. It is not much further to the Los Angeles power market than Boulder Canyon is; the Diamond Creek plant will put power into Los Angeles cheaper than the Boulder Canyon will, and as soon as the California people realize this they will be for the Diamond Creek site.
 "It is inexplicable to me that a county that could have it's choice of having the Diamond Creek plant or the Boulder Canyon dam would take the Boulder Canyon. I ask you to point out just wherein was in erDr when I stated that not one single acre of land would be irrigated on the Arizona side by the Boulder Cam yon dam; I emphasize the fact that not one single acre additional will be put under cultivation. When the Dia- mond Creek project is built in Mo have county it will be a taxable plant and will furnish power to Mohave county; if the Boulder Canyon plant is built, it will be built from the Las Vegas side; it will not bring one cent of revenue into Mohave county; it will not furnish any power to Mohave county; it will not irrigate an acre of land in Mohave county, so why, in the name of God, is Mohave county for it?
 "It is not necessary to build py- ramidal reservoir at either Boulder Canyon or Glen Canyon; it would be an outrage to taxpayers to build either of these structures as suggest ed. A dam 300 feet high at Glen Canyon will protect the Imperial val ley from flood menace; dam 400 feet high will regulate the flow of this river so that it will take care of the irrigable lands that can be put under it for the next ten years, so why build this tremendous structure!
 "You say: The funny thing about the Grand article is that he seems to labor under the delusion that if the Glen Canyon dam is built Arizona will come into the use and ownership of the greater part of the water sup ply and all the other countries will have to get down on their benders and say '"By your leave," when they want more of the rivers water. Tnis is the purest kind of bunk
 "It certainly is-bunk created by you. There is nothing whatever in my article that could possibly be so construed; you have added it. l am not laboring under any delusion except that if the Glen Canyon project is built whatever water is stored by the Glen Canyon dam will go down the river in an orderly manner instead of during the floods of May, June and July. None of the water would be touched except to go through the water wheels and then back into the river, and nobody would have to go down on their benders' whatever that may mean. The water being in a gorge it would be impossible to divert it; it does not require an engineer or even a man with much brains to realize that if the flow of the Colo |rado river could be regulated and have drop of 5000 feet, you would
 get just as much power in this reg ulated distance as you would in the
 drop over the Boulder Canyon dam.
 You could figure this out yourself.
 'It is not question of the state
 of Arizona claiming any right on an
 international stream; it is question
 of the use of the water. You know
 as does everyone concerned with this
 problem, that the Colorado river is not and never was navigable