Arizona republican., 1922-03-17


not decided whether an honest-to-
goodness dam can be constructed at
either place. Certainly the Boulder
Canyon project has every advantage
against a rock fill dam 200 feet high.
/ would not care to live in either the
Yuma or Imperial valleys If such
dam were in existence.
"Arizona should take the position
that she is anxious to see develop
ment 60 forward. She should place
no obstacles in the way of develop
ment, but it is my belief that we Will
suffer loss OF five years before the
Boulder Canyon project is ap-
preached.
'Tt certainly would be a great bene
fit to the Imperial valley, where the
flood menace would be dissipated and
the river flow in summer increaseu.
TO E0UALIZE CANYON REGION
For the equalization of the Can
Won region, pending the outcome of
the Boulder Canyon controversy, L
would build two comparatively small
dams in Utah-the Dewey and Flam-
ing Gorge dams. Reports on these
dams are favorable and costs are
modest"
Arizona industry urges haste in the
construction of the development pro
gram, Professor Smith declared in
turning to the subject or marker
for power.
"Mines of this state look forward
with dismay to the decreasing fuel
oil supply. OF course. II VIII pc
possible TO get all the oil neeoed 10
continue operations for many years
to come. but on a rising market. De-
velopment OF hydro electric power on
the Colorado is their salvation. l
speak also OF the power needs for
agricultural development. Much or
our agricultural section is depend
able upon power for pumping water
for irrigation purposes. The position
in which these lands are placed Is
summed UP nicely in the recent CEN
sus, which says that one-twelfth or
the acreage in Arizona is irrigated
by pumping projects and that the
costs Of such pumping projects is
about six times the cost under the
gravity system. What we want
therefore, is cheap power; not cheap
power 90 years from now. but imme-
diately."
"Then you would give agriculture
priority over power in the develop
ment program?" Chairman Hoover
asked.
$50 far as 1 can visualize condi-
tions. / most certainly would give
agriculture the preference over pow
err" Professor Smith replied.
''Do you think that there should be
provision in the Boulder canyon
dam construction plans that wouio
give lower states no priority or wa
ter use against upper states!' the
chairman asked.
"Yes. sir, l would" was the reply.
"And do you think any agreement
on that subject would not lie sub
ject to repeal?" the chairman furth-
er inquired.
81 can think OF no state that would
go back on its agreement" the wit
ness replied.
"Do YOU think that development
of lands below the dam would be
warranted without assurance that
their water rights would not be I'M
paired in the future?" asked the
chairman.
piled. II have too much confidence
in the reclamation service to believe
otherwise"
O.-"And do you feel that Arizo-
ma and California would disclaim pri.
ority by virtue Of any Development
Yes, sir; so far as future ap-
preparations are concerned"
Turning from this line OF ques-
tioning to a discussion Of the Max
we'll plan as presented Wednesday,
Chairman Hoover asked:
"Have you ever examined Max
wells high line ditch project and II
so, what were your conclusions?
"Yes, / examined the proposal and
looked at contour maps. l have tried
assiduously during the last few
months to give high desert lands OF
Arizona this water supply. / found
that the cost of the project would be
at least $500 per acre and no one
would invest half that amount. Why,
then, should we consider it," Pro-
fessor Smith replied. adding:
ARIZONA'S LIMIT 1000. .ooo. 600
ACRES
"We have been fed UP on that q
SOC. 900 acre reclamation project for
the last two months until we have
come to think that somewhere in
Arizona there are 100000 acres OF
desert land susceptible TO irrigation.
After counting out every acre OF ir-
rigable lands that / can find on the
maps. il would be with considerable