OCR Text |
Show -8- works, elimination of levee flood control costs and of the Mexican carrying costs, and assuming that the cultivated area never expands and that all of the cost is borne by the farmer on an acreage basis (actually, all cities in the district contribute on an ad valorem basis), nevertheless, the gross annual charge per acre would be less than a dollar for each of the first five years, less than two dollars for each of the next ten, and less than three for each of the next twenty-five. That the lands are amply able to carry these charges, our soil and economic surveys show. As for the argument that drainage will be inadequate, the United States reserves the right to measure water uses at any points it pleases, and as water deliveries depend largely on releases from Hoover Dam, the water will be fairly used. It should no longer be necessary to sluice out canals to free them of silt. But if drainage is a problem, it is obviously essential that all lands be furnished water from one irrigation district controlling all individual deliveries. It is impossible to reserve to the district the right to sell water to Mexico, as the Protective Association asks. There is no basis for such action. No treaty has been made with Mexico for the division and delivery of water. No one can foretell how much water will be awarded Mexico under such treaty, if and when made, where water will be delivered, or any of the other details necessarily involved. All of these objections minimize the controlling reason for enactment of this legislation by Congress, which was substitution of an American-controlled water system for a foreign-controlled one. The present canal runs through Mexico and one condition of the Mexican con- |
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. |