The Winslow mail., 1923-07-27
CONGRESSMAN HAYDEN
Tells ROTARY CLUB OF
RIVER DEVELOPMENT
Continued from page one)

Colorado river, which would use
about 100000 acre feet of water. If
the Parker-Gila Valley project, as
suggested by Mr.. La Rue and his
associates, is carried out about $780,,
600 additional acres may be irrigated
in the United States, which would
require 100000 acre-feet of water
or total of 100000 acre feet. 1t
will be observed that in any event
that the water supply is adequate to
care for the reclamation of this ex
ira land in Arizona and California.
1t seems to me that the plan to |
irrigate 100000 acres in the lower |
Gila valley is worthy of the most
careful investigation While $168 an
acre is more than any farmer can
now afford to pay for bringing water
to raw desert land yet this project
may become entirely feasible within
a generation. By that time cheap
power will be available from the
Colorado river which will reduce the
cost of construction. The normal
increase of population in the United
States will not only create demand
for more agricultural land, but
should cause farm products to bring !
relatively higher prices. Undoubt-
edly the inventive genius Of the Ame-
rican people will improve the means
of pumping water, of blasting rock |
in tunnels and Of removing earth to
make canals. The prediction can
therefore be safely made that this |
and many other irrigation projects,
the cost of which is now considered |
to be excessive, will probably be
constructed
While it may be entirely proper
for the Arizona legislature to ap-
propriate $25, 1000 for further study |
of the high line canal plan yet every
one must agree that the commission
was correct in it's conclusion that
S225 per acre is a prOhibitive recla-
nation charge at the present time. |
AS a member of the committee on
irrigation or arid lands I have list
ened to the testimony of water users i
from all of the federal reclamation
projects and in every instance where
the construction charge is over $40
an acre the farmers are complaining
bitterly.
In some cases they have asserted
that it is impossible to secure enough
from the net returns from the sale
of their crops to meet the payments
due to the government even though
no interest is charged.
To reclaim 100000 acres at cost
of 1925 per acre will require $780,
100000. That amounts to more than
half of the taxable wealth of Arizona
so this state cannot finance such an
undertaking. 1t is equally certain
that the United States will not in
vest any money in an enterprise
when there is not the remotest pos
sibility that the cost of the project
would be repaid.
an hn
the Colorado river problem agrees
that the present time, with the ex-
listing prices for crops grown on ir-
rigated farms, there are not enough
practicable irrigation projects with !
in the entire basin of the Colorado
river to utilize all the waters of that
steram Looking into the future
Mr.. La Rue in his supplemental re-
port says the time may come when
"the water supply of the Colorado
river may not be sufficient to re-
claim the lands which may be found
commercially feasible of develop
ment."
If this opinion is correct what are
we going to do about it? Shall the
federal government refuse to do any
thing because of the possibly that
all demands cannot be satisfied?
Shall each of the states of the Colo
rado basin enter race to acquire
prior rights to the use of water by
issuing bonds to build irrigation pro-
jects which it is admitted will not be
successful? Shall they file suits
against each other in the supreme
court to prevent development? The
answer to all such questions is that
the only sane and sensible way to
proceed is for the United and the
seven states to make an agreement
which will equitably apportion the
waters of she Colorado river
The Colorado river compact does
not fix the exact amount of water
which each of the seven states may
use. 1t merely makes a beginning
by providing for a fair division of
water between the upper and the
lower basin in quantities which are
more than sufficient for the present
and immediate future needs of each
basin. The lower basin has a great
advantage in this arrangement be-
cause water will run down hill and
that which is not consumed above
will be available for use below The
fact that the compact appOrtiOns to
the upper basin more water than can
be used is therefore no serious me-
mace to the future of the lower ba-
sin. That visionary and impra ctical
projects are being proposed in New
Mexico, Colorado, Utah or Wyoming
does not justify us in insisting upon
the reservation of water for equally
visionary and impractical projects in
the lower basin. If We are bound to
have visions of a demand for water
which two rivers like the Colorado
could not supply.
l am firmly convinced that with
out an agreement with the federal
government and the six other states
there is no way in which Arizona can
obtain the benefits that this state
should receive from the Colorado
river. There is nothing in the re-
port of the Arizona Engineering