AZ vs. CA:25 California Exhibits, Vol. XXV; Nos. 7501-7859

page 3

RETURN TO FILES OF September 34, 1945 Honorable Harold L. Ickes "Secretary of the Interior Washington, D. C. ar Mr. Secretary; Some months ago you entered into a contract with the State Arizona, whereby Arizona was to receive at her quota 2,800,000 acre feet water out of the Colorado River. I am very anxious to get more information regarding that contract. Therefore, I nay subsequently ask/ you other questions in addition to the one contained herein. Naturally, I assume that any part or all of the 3,800,. acre feet of water, which is Arizona's quota under that contract, might be taken out of the river above Boulder Dam, if it was to Arizona's advantage to do so. Am I right in assuming that the contract covert .?,800,000 acre feet of water annually for Arizona In "-consumptive use" If so, that leads up to my main question, which is: /* If any part of this 2,800,000 acre feet should be pumped out' of the river or Lake Mead and used on land for irrigation where the return flow would come back into the river, vould there be any "credit computed to Arisona under the oontractt To illustrate - supposing vat were pumped out of I*ls» Mead to irrigate land in the Detrltal Valley or the Hualpai Valley, where the return flow would go right back into Lake -lead, could the amount charged against Arizona's quota of 2,600,000 acre feet be reduced by the amount of such return flowT "'Tint would be the return flow In that case? These two areas are adjacent to Lake Mead. The water which Might be applied there would be put on land within a few miles of the lake's shore line, and naturally, a large percentage of the water so used for Irrigation would be return flow. Of course, I am not an engineer, but I can'see that the percentage of'return flow would vary In each case, and I presume it would depend upon evaporation. In the locality rnd maybe some other factors. Mr. Secretary, I aa Riving a lot ef thought to the life and death matter of irrigation In my state. It is a hard and cruel fact that there is not -only more land needing water than we hare water for, buv that we have overdeveloped some of the existing projects to the extent that they could use all of the water we have contracted for without any being put on new lands.. If I were adding to Senator McTarland's report In whidh he summed up the findings in four words - these four word* being, "Arizona needs more water", I would add four more words - "Arizona needs more water nnfl needs %j now", row, I am told that water cannot be com-