and you create a condition that in the long run will be a very hazardous one, in my opinion.

Now, we have no interest in such amendments as those, as I say, except that we believe that they run to the amicable carrying out of the provisions of the contract which has been entered into. We are satisfied that that contract-we are perfectly satisfied that the amount of water adjudged to us will be sufficient for our purposes, but even in the face of the contract if there is not water enough for all we are going to find ourselves confronted by lawsuits and controversies and troubles of different kinds. That is why we feel justified in dwelling somewhat upon that matter.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Now, Senator, you state that you don't believe that there is sufficient water for both propositions at this time. What do you base that statement on?

Mr. WINSOR. There is sufficient water for both projects, so far as the present irrigated acreage is concerned.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Then what do you base your statement on relative to future projects?

Mr. WINSOR. I base it on the observation that during the low periods of the year at the present time there is just about enough of water for the lands that are under cultivation.

Mr. TAYLOR. Have you got all your lands under cultivation?

Mr. WINSOR. No, sir; we have not, and when we have them all under cultivation the margin is going to be closer than it is now.

Mr. TAYLOR. You claim priority for the lands that you have under irrigation over the Imperial Valley for the lands that they have under cultivation?

Mr. SWING. As a part of the price of getting the use of the Laguna Dam the Imperial Valley was required to concede to Yuma, both for the lands under cultivation and the lands not under cultivation, prior water rights up to one-fourth of the flow of the river, and the Secretary was instructed to divert it to you. Is that not right? Mr. WINSOR. Well, Mr. Davis may state that.

Mr. DAVIS. May I correct that, Mr. Chairman? I am more familiar with that contract and with that provision. I think it is fair and does not give priority to either one. At a low stage or at any stage where there could be any dispute the rights are equal. One side' would have one-fourth and the other side would have three-fourths. The Imperial Valley gets three-fourths of the water at low water and Yuma one-fourth, and the Secretary has the carrying out of that by the provisions of the agreement providing for the building of the Laguna Dam.

The CHAIRMAN. Will that continue to be so after the rest of the Yuma project has been reclaimed?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. SWING. Mr. Davis, that was based upon 100,000 acres in Yuma, of which only 30,000 are under cultivation, and 400,000 in Imperial Valley, all of which is in cultivation?

Mr. DAVIS. Whatever it is based upon, that is the provision of the contract. It doesn't give a priority; it gives three times as much water to Imperial Valley as to Yuma, with equal rights to that much.

Mr. SWING. It gives the same right to the cultivated and uncultivated land in the Yuma project.

Mr. TAYLOR. Would that contemplate, then, that the Yuma people should pay their one-fourth proportionate share of these storage facilities hereafter?

Mr. DAVIS. No, sir; the assumption is that the unregulated water supply of the river is sufficient for the lands now under cultivation, including the entire Yuma project that is not under cultivation. The Imperial rights are based upon use of water; the Laguna rights are based upon acts of Congress-that is, the Yuma project rights are based upon the act of Congress which authorizes diversion of that water and over which Congress has jurisdiction; therefore, the area of the Yuma project is taken as having a gilt-edged water right without storage. The area that has been cultivated under the Imperial Valley is also taken as having a gilt-edged water right equal to that of Yuma, divided in the proportions indicated in the contract, one-fourth to the Yuma project, and three-fourths to the Imperial project, with equal rights to those two.

Mr. TAYLOR. How will that apply when the Yuma project brings all the rest of their land under cultivation? Will the one-fourth be sufficient?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. WINSOR. That statement is very accurate, Mr. Chairman, and I would add that the right of the Yuma project is limited again by acreage. We have the right to one-fourth of the water, or up to an amount sufficient to irrigate a limit of 120,000 acres. In no event can we get more than one-fourth of the water, and in no event can we get more than sufficient, as determined by the Secretary of the Interior, to irrigate 120,000 acres.

Mr. TAYLOR. Senator, are the Yuma people satisfied with the allotment recommended by Secretary Lane of $1,600,000 as the Imperial Valley's proportionate share that they should pay toward the construction of the dam?

Mr. WINSOR. Yes, sir; they are satisfied with the contract as it exists. I proposed at the hearing, at which the contract was being discussed, that the amount should be fixed by arriving at the exact acreage to be served on each side of the river, and the cost should be based upon the exact acreage, but the statement was made there, I believe by Mr. Davis, that that was approximately what was being done now under the $1,600,000 price. So, that matter was dropped there and we were perfectly willing that the amount should be their exact proportion according to the acreage. I think that in the long run we would have gotten quite a bit more money in that way, but that is neither here nor there; we are satisfied.

Mr. TAYLOR. Then, your recommendation for storage to be built up the river is not necessarily to enhance the value of the Yuma water right, but is for the purpose of benefiting Imperial Valley?

Mr. WINSOR. That and to throw around the contract that other safeguard of their being no shortage of water. I feel that if there is a shortage of water, that even our contract will meet with trouble. Whenever there is a shortage of water in the arid West, as any of you gentlemen who have had direct experience with it know, whenever that shortage exists there is trouble, no matter how many contracts you have.

Mr. TAYLOR. There is always another element to think of, and that is the Mexican people and the Mexican Government, and whatever rights they may have or claim to have down there isn't there?

Mr. WINSOR. Yes; that is a very important thing to take into consideration; for, regardless of whether they have any legal right, I should say that the chances are that they will continue to irrigate their lands by one means or another, and there should certainly be water to cover that, in my judgment.

Mr. SINNOTT. Is there any controversy between you people as to the right of the Federal Government to apportion the water?

Mr. WINSOR. No; that is absolutely in the hands of the Secretary of the Interior and it is very satisfactory. That is fixed by the contractthe terms of the contract that has been entered into.

Mr. SINNOTT. Has the statute ever been questioned among you people the right of the Federal Government to pass such an act distributing water?

Mr. WINSOR. No.

Mr. SINNOTT. There is no controversy over that at all?

No

Mr. WINSOR. NO controversy at all. We are perfectly satisfied with both the law and the contract that has been entered into, and are willing to abide by it and would very much regret to see anything occur to abrogate any feature of it; not but that we could write a contract that would suit us better, but as a matter of compromise that has been agreed upon and we are entirely satisfied to abide by it, and we would feel very uneasy if anything occurred to do away with it, and it is our constant uneasiness that, of course, has brought us up here. We are interested in seeing that we are protected, and to that extent we feel that it is right that we should be.

Mr. SWING. Under the contract the diversion works and the matter of dividing water remains entirely in the hands of the Secretary of the Interior.

Mr. WINSOR. Yes. With these changes in the bill, and such other changes relating to governmental policies as you see fit, we feel very strongly in favor of the bill. We are extremely anxious, I will say, that something be done to enable the Imperial irrigation district to get away from the construction of weir dams below their heading opposite our works as soon as possible, and they seem to be very much opposed to the idea of constructing what is known as one leg of the canal until absolute assurance is had of the construction of the allAmerican canal. I very much favor the construction of the allAmerican canal myself from the standpoint of reclamation, but from the standpoint of the project we would like to see anything done which will enable them to get a water supply elsewhere than at their present heading. And it does seem to me that if the proper provision could be made that the first leg of the canal should be constructed as soon as possible, as the necessity for the weir dam continues.

Mr. HERNANDEZ. I would like to interrupt to ask you, is the Colorado River practically the boundary line between Mexico and Arizona there?

Mr. WINSOR. Yes; it is the boundary line.

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Now, these Mexican landholders will not be permitted to put their dam where it is now, and they will go below, probably?

Mr. WINSOR. They couldn't put a dam there because they only have control of one side of the river.

Mr. HERNANDEZ. Well, they can put a dam on their side of the river. Will that endanger the Yuma project in any way?

Mr. WINSOR. If they were permitted to put a dam on their side, in Mexican territory, immediately below the present dam, it would endanger our lands, but we wouldn't permit that, and could prevent them from doing it because we would have control of the Arizona side of the river.

Mr. TAYLOR. They can go down farther, can't they, and put in a head gate?

Mr. WINSOR. They can go clear down below the Arizona line. Mr. TAYLOR. On their own ground, and if it is an engineering possibility to put in a dam, of course, they could do it. I don't know whether it is an engineering possibility or not.

The CHAIRMAN. That has already been testified to by Director Davis.

Mr. DAVIS. They say the slope of the country is such that they could get the water from down below.

Mr. WINSOR. There is a little diversion down there now which some of the Imperial Valley gentlemen could tell you of. I think Mr. Swing made a little error to-night when he said there was no diversion down there, for there is a little diversion, I believe.

Mr. BARBOUR. I would like to ask the Senator this: What is the boundary between Arizona and Mexico down below the California line there? Is it the old river channel or the present channel?

Mr. WINSOR. Well, it is supposed to be wherever the channel is. That, I believe, is the law.

Mr. BARBOUR. The middle of the river, the middle of the stream? Mr. WINSOR. Yes, sir. I believe that is all I have to say, gentle

man.

I thank you.

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I present Col. B. F. Fly, of Yuma, Ariz., who comes here with credentials from the Yuma County Commercial Club.

STATEMENT OF MR. B. F. FLY, OF YUMA, ARIZ., REPRESENTING THE YUMA COUNTY COMMERCIAL CLUB.

Mr. FLY. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, my associate, Senator Winsor, has so thoroughly covered this subject and I am in such hearty accord with everything that he said that I will not weary you with anything except to follow out a suggestion that Senator Winsor just made about a small diversion of the Lower California side of the river beyond what is now known as the Imperial irrigation district. There is a new irrigation project there, taken directly from the Colorado River at the foot of Sierra Mayor. That is in the State of Lower California. I was there on the 22d and 23d of last January to examine it myself. They have a very large pumping plant there; they have built a canal 25 to 30 miles long for the purpose of irrigating anywhere from 25,000 to 50,000 acres of land at the head of Laguna Salada, which is shown on the map there [indicating]. That land down there is being irrigated now by the canal coming out from way up where the Hardy River comes out of Volcano Lake-you can see

it on the map there [indicating]. With that exception, it would be impossible for the people on the Lower California side to obtain any water except through the Hanlon heading gates, because if you come down any farther, of course the general topography of the country follows the river, going down all the time, you couldn't build a dam down there and run water back up. There is no place for the Mexican lands to get water except at the present intake of the Imperial irrigation district.

What the people in Yuma are interested in is to do away with that Hanlon heading dam that is a constant menace to us. I, in conjunction with Senator Winsor, and our other citizens, have thought that for the last five years. Now, if they can build their all-American canal, I say God-speed them, but don't wipe Yuma off the map in the meantime by keeping that dam in there. We have them under a bond now that they must remove every particle of that dam by some month in 1921, under a $540,000 bond. If they don't remove it, we will take that $540,000 and attempt to remove the dam, but I don't think that sum will remove the tenth part of it.

Mr. HUDSPETH. Will you sate where that dam is on the map? Mr. FLY. Right there [indicating]. Now, at the present time, within the last three years, they have dumped into the river there from bank to bank over 10,000 carloads of rock, and have been pretending to take it out each year. They put in a few boxes of dynamite and shoot a passageway through, and their contract has been with us to remove it in its entirety every year-not with us but with the War Department, and that privilege has been given them every year over our solemn protest. So we take the position that even the Secretary of War has no right to give anybody the right to dam up a navigable stream.

The CHAIRMAN. Does dynamite blow the rock clear out of the river?

Mr. FLY. It just scatters it.

The CHAIRMAN. In the river?

Mr. FLY. In the river. It just makes a solid apron from bank to bank for about 600 feet up and down the stream. The weir itself stands up as high as the banks and a little higher than our banks, raising the water last year 10 feet in order to get it in their intake, because their canal has become so silted, or so congested with silt and sand, that each year they have to keep raising this dam, and that forces the water up now 10 feet against our land for 6 miles, and it is creating seepage.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, the dynamite lowers the dam?

Mr. FLY. Oh, yes; it lowers it.

The CHAIRMAN. And scatters the rock?

Mr. FLY. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And puts it over more of the bed of the river? Mr. FLY. It lowers it to such an extent that they have to rebuild it in order to get the water running in their canal.

Mr. TAYLOR. But they don't obliterate the rock?

Mr. FLY. No. But we are very heartily in favor of this bill as amended, carrying out the suggestions of Secretary Lane and the suggestions Senator Winsor has made. I say that I and we are very