OCR Text |
Show high and nearly constant heads. Other power sites may be related to conservation storage upstream. Building single-purpose upstream power projects has been proposed in some cases as a Federal under- taking, particularly where reregulation is provided by Federal reservoirs. The power available would be used to firm the power output at main reservoir plants, and for irrigation pumping. In addition to the power benefits, carry-over of water stored in some upstream reservoirs from wet to dry years would tend to increase the firm irrigation supply downstream. These upstream reservoirs in a few cases would be the only source of water for irriga- ble lands in mountain or foothill areas. In cases where there are conflicts between plans for Federal construction of such projects and plans for construction by private interests, the following points should be considered: (a) The desirability of maintaining competing sources of power supply in the region, and the physical xequirements of the competing systems. (b) Relative incidental benefits to irrigation in the main valley from upstream power provided by public or private dams. (c) The relation of the proposed project to other facilities in a program. For instance, where a given agency has built a key project, such as a stor- age or regulating reservoir required to make possi- ble the best use of downstream or upstream power sites, it would seem logical for the same agency to develop such power sites. Because of the close operational relationship among some past private developments, a single license has been considered applicable to the storage project and the upstream or downstream sites. (d) The relationship of the proposed project to the gener-al objectives of the Federal river basin program. (e) The degree of fuel conservation brought about. Either private or Federal use of a given hydroelectric site is, in general, equally effective in conserving fuel resources. (f) Payment from power revenues for irrigation, taking into account any policy changes concerning reimbursement. (g) The ultimate efficiency in use of the site under plans proposed by private interests as com- pared to the State or Federal Government. In addition to the field of power, there also is a definite place for participation by private enter- prise in all other phases of water resources use and control. These include especially the abatement of pollution (as by manufacturing industry) and 112 in watershed management. Proper watershed treatment cannot be achieved without material assistance from land owners and operators. Conclusions Private citizens as individuals or as groups have played an important role in the past development of water resources. However, responsibility for future activity must rest more heavily with public agencies. The construction of the great multiple- purpose projects and interbasin diversions are clearly undertakings for Federal or State initiation. However, local public agencies and private groups appear to have places in future development of irrigation, hydroelectric power, watershed manage- ment, recreation, and pollution control. Future concern by local agencies and private initiative will relate to those local features which can be under- taken without conflict with multiple-purpose use or national power policy. This does not exclude local participation in essential parts of major under- takings. The principal issue in further planning for this basin concerns the extent to which Federal and private agencies should participate in the electric power production in headwater areas. In these areas about 4.6 million kilowatts of hydroelectric generating capacity can ultimately be added. From the more limited point of view of conserv- ing energy resources, a decision might be reached in terms of the likelihood that private corporations would undertake specific projects under license at an earlier date than Federal agencies dependent on congressional appropriations. There is no cer- tainty as to what the answer would be, for it would unquestionably be influenced by the extent to which Federal agencies came forward with sound plans. In general and over the Nation as a whole, produc- tion of hydroelectric power in recent years has pro- ceeded more rapidly as a part of multiple-purpose river basin programs than was characteristic of the single-purpose private development era. This has not been the case generally in the Central Valley. But there are broader considerations of the public interest which must be taken into account. They include the part which power will play in a well- rounded, multiple-purpose basin program offering irrigation benefits. Irrigation would not be finan- cially feasible without the assistance of low-cost power for pumping. They also include considera- tion of the future importance of such projects as |