OCR Text |
Show LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. Department of the Interior, Washington, February 28, 1922. The President of the Senate. Sir: Section 1 of the act of Congress approved May IS, 1920 (41 Stat., 600), authorized and directed the Secretary of the Interior to have studies made of Imperial Valley, Calif., and related subjects with respect to irrigation from the Colorado River. Section 2 of the act required the Secretary to report to Congress the result of such examination not later than December 6, 1920. On that day a report was accordingly transmitted by letter from Secretary Payne in which the following statement was made: Because of the limited time since the passage of the act, further restricted by the regular high-water period of the river, the investigations begun have not been completed. The studies will be continued as rapidly as the physical conditions and available funds permit, and their results will be forwarded to Congress as promptly as possible. I now have the honor to send herewith the more complete report by the Director of the Reclamation Service contemplated by the foregoing language. The submission of this report has been greatly delayed not only by the physical limitations but by human considerations. Section 4 of the act required the Secretary of the Interior to report, among other things, "what assurances he has been able to secure as to the approval of, participation in, and contribution to the plan or plans proposed by the various contributing agencies." It followed from this language that the nature of the report to be submitted depended on the attitude of the various local communities interested, and to determine that attitude it was necessary to refer to or discuss with them the report to be made. That was first done by correspondence and at meetings with their representatives held in this city, following which the report was placed in my hands last July. However, the same day that I received it I received also a telegram from one of the local communities asking further delay and discussion before submission of a report to Congress. In order to secure as near as might be unanimity of those involved, the report was held for further discussion and consideration. This continued by correspondence, wide publicity in the local press, and extended discussions in various meetings in the Southwest. Finally, I personally proceeded to San Diego, Calif., where on December 12, 1921, I held an open hearing on the subject, so that everyone interested might have an opportunity to express his views. The result has been virtual unanimity regarding the desirability of constructing the large project outlined in the report. This general agreement is well illustrated by the discussion at San Diego. This was stenographically reported, and for the information of Con- VII |
Source |
Original book: [State of Arizona, complainant v. State of California, Palo Verde Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, City of Los Angeles, California, City of San Diego, California, and County of San Diego, California, defendants, United States of America, State of Nevada, State of New Mexico, State of Utah, interveners] : |