OCR Text |
Show SPECIAL REPORTS 2-C-40 Vol. 35 In view of the attitude of tho Dixie River Company and tho State Engineer of Utah, whereby the v/ator supply of the Indians is being arbitrarily reduced because of tho excessive loon of water by tho power oorr.pany through their canal, and the further question as to whether under tho Winters' Decision we may claim v/ator for approximately £fiO acres of bench loud in addition to tho Bo acres in the Santa Clara Valley, this matter is presented to the Office in order that we may be advised and instructed as to what should be done. In view of tho Questionable status of ova- water supply ond water rights for this reservation, It is my opinion that any construction work of a permanent nature, such ao la contemplated "by tho appropriation for the present fiscal year, should bo deferred until those Questions are settled or decided by tho Office. While tho Santa Clara Bench Irrigation Company hot: seems to be In a bankrupt condition and unable to substantially improve or rebuild their diversion dam, the fact remains that they occupy tho only feasible site for a permanent diversion structure along this part of tho river and for several miles above and below tho site of tho structure The north abutment of their weir, as well as their canal headgate, is founded upon solid rock, and so also is the south abutment* If tho Office decides it to be advisable to proceed with tho construction of a permanent diversion, we could provide such permanent diversion by rebuilding the Santa Clara dam, inasmuch as it occupies tha only feasible site available for much less than we could provide a permanent diversion weir at any other point. Under tho circumstances, if tho Office decides that it ia inadvisable to delay construction until after tho water right question ia settled or adjudicated» it would be toy recommendatIon to construct our permanent diversion at the site now occupied by the Santa Clara Canal Company and divert our water through their canal, providing satisfactory arrangements can be made, aa I believe they oan bo. While the Santa Clara Company state that they aro unable in tho' present condition of their f inances to advance any money toward the reconstruction of their dam, they express themselves as being agreeable to contributing labor to whatever extent may be equitably agreed upon. Will tho Office please advice what should bo done concerning thio matter? If any further information or data is desired, v;e shall be lad to sUpply tho cano if poGsibleo Vor.v ronpootfully, CAE/HBB Copy to Dr. E. A. Farrow. c. A. Bn«l«. Suporvloinp; Divineer. |
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] : California exhibits. |