OCR Text |
Show has been recommended by the Chief of Engineers and authorized by the Secretary of War prior to beginning the same. 5. It is understood that the company desires permission from the War Department to cover the works already constructed and certain extensions of the same. No plans for either the completed portion of the work, or the proposed extension, are presented, and if such plans were now presented, it is believed that it would not be permissible for the War Department to authorize that portion of the works heretofore commenced or completed, as the power conferred upon the Department by the aforesaid law, must be exercised, if at all, prior to the commencement of the work. Moreover, the law limits the power of the War Department in authorizing work that will modify or alter the condition or capacity of a navigable stream, to authorizing such work as will not materially injure, or destroy, the navigable capacity of the stream. Hence, any permit granted by the War Department in this case could apply only to new work contemplated, and could authorize the taking only of surplus water from the river, that is, the drawing of such an amount of water only as will not injuriously affect the navigability of the stream. 6. In view of the foregoing, I recommend that no formal permission be granted, but that the company be informed that the War Department will not interfere with its operations, provided such operations are so conducted as not to injuriously affect the interests of navigation. G. L. Gillespie, Brig. Gen., Chief of Engineers, U. S. Army. |
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. |