OCR Text |
Show -5- Rights Protective Association, Coachella Valley Landowners' Association, the County of San Diego, City of San Diego, the Imperial Irrigation District, Coachella Valley County Water District, and several individuals who had written including F. W. Greer and J. C. Allison. All of these replied, some filing briefs and letters, and letters were also filed by Charles N. Stahl, S. S. M. Jennings, and Fred L. Brainerd. Numerous individual indorsements need not be tabulated here. Palo Verde Irrigation District, Imperial Irrigation District, and Coachella Valley County Water District were personally represented. I have given careful consideration to all of the objections made, the most important of which are discussed below. The protests will be discussed separately. San Diego. The City of San Diego and the County of San Diego have advised that they have no objections. Coachella Valley Landowners' Association. The chief objection of this association is the proposed combination of the Imperial and Coachella Valleys in one contract, the inclusion of new lands, and the apprehension that 10,000 second feet of water will be insufficient to irrigate the 1,000,000 acres of land ultimately proposed. This association admits that Colorado River water is indispensable to Coachella Valley's further and complete development. It is generally agreed that the Coachella Valley would be unable to finance or furnish security for construction of a separate canal from the Colorado River. If water from this river is to be secured, the only feasible |
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. |