The CHAIRMAN. Is that sediment still used along the Nile to fertilize the lands?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. LITTLE. Is that the system used at the other dams on the Nile? Mr. DAVIS. The other dams are simply low diversion dams that do not store any water. They are filled all the time; simply a channel through them. In the case of a diversion dam it does not matter if it does fill up. Laguna dam filled up with sediment the first year.

Mr. LITTLE. Now, I don't know what you mean by that. If they are filled up with sediment, of what use are they?

Mr. Davis. It simply diverts the river; it doesn't store any water; that is the case with the Laguna Dam.

Mr. LITTLE. There is one on the Nile below Cairo that has been there for 70 or 80 years, and part of the year it is closed up, and there must necessarily form some body of water there.

Mr. DAVIS. It is filled with sediment, though.

The CHAIRMAN. Now, Director Davis, you deem that the provisions of this bill will give them a more comprehensive report than anything that has yet been made in regard to surveys of the valley as one proposition; that is, taking it altogether, the other surveys the information that you have gained from the other surveys has all been combined?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; the information existing has been well combined in the last report issued by this board, of which you have a copy. I wanted to make another statement, Mr. Chairman, of the work that is necessary. Next to the investigation of storage, which is vital, in my opinion next in importance is an investigation of the soil. The Imperial-Laguna Mesa is a very large tract of practically unknown land, very sandy and difficult to travel over in an automobile, not because there is any brush in the way, because there isn't, but on account of the sand. The physical appearance is similar to the Yuma mesa and its formation is probably somewhat similar. We have examined the Yuma mesa fairly well, and we believe that to be good soil, although it greatly needs humus. But that is the only line that we have on the value of the Imperial-Laguna mesa. There should be a thorough investigation made of the physical and chemical characteristics of that soil before a vast amount of money is spent in irrigating it. It may be that some parts will have to be eliminated.

Another thing that ought to be investigated is the areas that can be irrigated feasibly by this canal system. Those areas have not been classified into irrigable and nonirrigable lands, and that should be done, so that we will know how large to build the canal and how much land we will have to draw on and the character of the land. Now, this soil survey is necessary for an intelligent classification of the irrigability of that land, how much of it is irrigable, and what class it belongs to, and whether it is first class or second class; and there are questions as to whether the various districts, Coachella district, will come in and cooperate, and so on.

The CHAIRMAN. You want to apportion off, though, the contribution that each agency will make if it does participate?

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir; this bill requires that, and that, of course, is one of the questions inseparably linked up with the one of who will

cooperate. That depends largely on what terms they can obtain. If they have to take a secondary water supply they will pay so much and if they take a first water supply they will pay so much.

Mr. TAYLOR. In that connection, the thought has been running through my mind here as to whether or not it would be advisable or whether we ought to embody in this bill something about the Secretary of State-ask him to join in negotiations with the Mexican Government about that condition down there, or is this entirely our own affair on our side of the border without any consideration of the people below us?

Mr. DAVIS. Of course it is impossible to eliminate the Mexican menace from this problem without some action. I don't believe that there is any necessity at the present time of covering that in the bill..

Mr. TAYLOR. It seems to me that it would be a good idea to make some definite arrangement, if we can have it, with the Mexican Government, that would be enforceable, and something that is tangible, so that we will know where we are at on this thing, so that we will not be shooting all the time in the dark, so far as Mexico is concerned.

Mr. SUMMERS. Let me call attention to section 2, which says that the secretary shall make a report to Congress not later than the 6th day of December, 1920, as to the result of his examination, together with his recommendation as to the feasibility, necessity, and advisability of the undertaking of the participation by the United States in a plan of irrigation development with a view of placing under irrigation the remaining unirrigated public and privately owned lands in that valley. Under that it seems to me that one secretary will have authority and will be supposed to call on the other where there was an international question involved.

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Davis, you spoke a moment ago about provision, which begins on line 25, page 2: "The proportion of the total cost that should be borne by the various irrigation districts, or associations, or other public or private agencies now organized, or which may be organized; and the manner in which their contributions should be made." Is it your understanding that that would require the Secretary of the Interior in making this report to definitely determine exactly the contribution that should be made by each organization, or would the secretary make only an approximate estimate? Mr. DAVIS. I should think it would be merely a recommendation on his part, and that it would be subject to modification afterwards. Mr. HAYDEN. It appears to me, the way it reads, to be a very rigid direction. The bill says that the said Secretary shall also report the proportion of the total cost that shall be borne by the various irrigation districts now organized or which may be organized, and the manner in which their contributions shall be made. If he made a finding to that effect, it certainly should be subject to review. It seems to me that the bill should read "the approximate amount," so that there would be a little leeway.

The CHAIRMAN. It says "in his opinion." That is a mere recom mendation.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes; that is what I understand it to be.

Mr. HAYDEN. My idea is that it would be better to say "approximate proportion."

The CHAIRMAN. That is all it could be, anyhow, an approximation. Mr. DAVIS. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that in line 16, page 3, the words "at least" be inserted between "of" and "one-half," so that it will read: "Provision shall have been made for the payment of at least one-half the cost of the examination."

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is a good suggestion. It occurred to me when we were speaking of that before.

66

Mr. SUMMERS. Then you will have to modify that "one-half" to 'not to exceed one-half" in the eleventh line of the same page. Mr. HAYDEN. Make it "not to exceed one-half."

Mr. SUMMERS. That would make it specific as to the gross

amount.

66

Mr. HAYDEN. There is one other question I wanted to ask Mr. Davis about the bill. On lines 3 and 4, page 2, it reads lands which can be irrigated at a reasonable cost from known sources of water supply." Is there any other known source of water supply than the Colorado River and will not all the water be diverted at the Laguna Dam?

Mr. DAVIS. It would; there is possibly some well water that might be pumped. I don't know why that was so expressed.

Mr. HAYDEN. The idea I have is this: That the people of the Imperial Valley have in mind a definite proposition; that is, they want to connect their present irrigation system with the Laguna Dam; they want to get water from the Colorado River from no other source. It seemed to me it would be easier to explain the bill to all concerned if instead of saying "known sources of water supply " we would say, "which can be irrigated at reasonable cost from the Colorado River by diversion of water at Laguna Dam."

Mr. DAVIS. I think that would be better.

Mr. SUMMERS. What line is that?

Mr. HAYDEN. Lines 3 and 4, page 2.

Mr. BARBOUR. Might not that have the effect, Mr. Hayden, of restricting operations?

Mr. HAYDEN. If there was any other known source of water supply, I would say yes, but there is not.

Mr. BARBOUR. Then, if there is not, why change it?

Mr. HAYDEN. It is better always to state the concrete facts, if possible. Now, if there is, in Mr. Davis's opinion, any other known source of water supply, it might be necessary to use the broader terms, but since he has expressed the opinion that all that anybody intends to do is to connect the present irrigation system in Imperial Valley with the Laguna Dam, why not say so?

Mr. DAVIS. I don't see any objection to your suggestion. One thing that might occur to some is that water is carried to Volcano Lake, for example, from Colorado River, and then is carried from there into Imperial Valley.

Mr. HAYDEN. That would require the construction of canals in Mexico, which nobody intends to do.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. SUMMERS. Doesn't this contemplate the headwaters of the Colorado, the Grand, or something of that kind? Isn't that what it indirectly refers to?

Mr. DAVIS. The storage might be up there but it does not contemplate any irrigation except the Imperial Valley.

The CHAIRMAN. "Known sources of water supply "includes storage with the other means. That includes storage.

Mr. DAVIS. I suppose that is what it was intended to cover.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand that is the signification of it-that is, that it includes storage.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Following out Mr. Hayden's suggestion, if I understand it, he wants to insert after the words "diversion of the waters of the Colorado River at Laguna Dam " the words "or from any other known sources of water supply." That would leave it open so you could get it from anywhere else.

Mr. HAYDEN. I want to make the terms of the bill perfectly clear so that the people who are most interested will not fail to understand that nothing else is contemplated except a connection with the Laguna Dam. Let them know that we had only that plan in mind. There is also another question that I want to ask. It seems to me that in simply saying "the Imperial Valley," as it appears in several places in the bill, it might be construed that the bill applied to what is technically known as the Imperial Valley; that is, the land now irrigated in the Imperial irrigation district, while as a matter of fact the project will include the east mesa, the west mesa, and possibly the Coachella Valley, which are not now known as part of the Imperial Valley. It seems to me that where that term "the valley " or "Imperial Valley" is used, we should add the words "and adjacent thereto." For instance, in line 12, section 2, "the remaining unirrigated public and privately owned lands in said valley." We should add the words "and adjacent thereto " before the words "in connection with the modification improvement," and so forth.

Then at the end of section 3: "the storage recommended and the use of the stored water in the Imperial Valley." Would it not make it certain that stored water is to be used in the east mesa to add "and adjacent lands"?

Mr. DAVIS. It might. You refer to the question as to whether the mesa would be, and the Coachella Valley would be considered part of the Imperial Valley?

Mr. HAYDEN. Yes. Look on a General Land Office map of the United States and you will see that the term Coahuila Valley is used to designate the whole area sometimes called the "Colorado Desert," or the "Salton Sink." The term Imperial Valley means only that part of the Coahuila Valley which is now included within the Imperial irrigation district. What is really intended is to not only examine land within the Imperial irrigation district, but also adjacent lands on the two mesas, and in the Coachella Valley.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir. I don't think anybody would question it, but it would not hurt anything to put that in.

The CHAIRMAN. The Imperial Valley-how is that properly understood? Is it not understood to comprehend all of those other lands, the mesa, and those adjacent lands?

Mr. DAVIS. That is the definition meant by this bill, of course.
The CHAIRMAN. The Coachella Valley also?

Mr. DAVIS. This bill so means it, but Mr. Hayden brings up the point that that might be disputed by somebody.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, what is the general understanding?

Mr. DAVIS. The Imperial Valley people are a better authority on that than I am.

Mr. ROSE. There is a division known as Imperial Valley and Coachella Valley, commonly spoken of as the land lying in Imperial County, of course, and Coachella Valley lies in Riverside County. The CHAIRMAN. Does it not all lie in Imperial Valley?

Mr. Rose. In speaking of the country in general it is generally spoken of as Salton Sink, or in those terms. It is not generally spoken of as Imperial Valley. What is spoken of as Imperial Valley is that land now under cultivation.

Mr. TAYLOR. Then we might just as well have Mr. Hayden's amendment go in there.

Mr. DAVIS. Yes, sir.

Mr. HAYDEN. Simply say: "In said valley and adjacent thereto." The CHAIRMAN. It will not hurt anything to put in the words "lands adjacent."

Mr. SMITH of Idaho. Or “contiguous."

Mr. HAYDEN. No; the word "contiguous" means actually touching. "Adjacent" is the better term.

Mr. DAVIS. Are there any other questions from the gentlemen of the committee?

The CHAIRMAN. On the whole, you regard the enactment of this bill as useful in the determination of the question of what legislation should be afforded the valley, do you?

Mr. DAVIS. It certainly is. It is very wise to have it. I would prefer, of course, to have more comprehensive legislation, but in the absence of or the possibility of that, this certainly is very wise and very necessary, and removes one of the great arguments against more comprehensive legislation at the present time, and I want to give an illustration, Mr. Chairman, from my own experience and that of the whole country, to illustrate this.

I was connected with the investigation of the Nicaragua Canal route in 1897 and 1898. At that time that route had been largely exploited and favored all over the country for years, and the claim was made that very thorough information existed regarding it, that we knew exactly how much it would cost, and everything of that kind, and an attempt was made to get legislation through to build that canal right away-the Nicaragua Canal-but it did not pass. Legislation similar to this bill was passed providing for an examination by a board of engineers headed by Gen. Ludlow, the other members being Mr. Noble and Admiral Endicott.

They made an investigation with a trifling amount of money compared with the magnitude of the problem, and they found that the estimates were totally inadequate; that the scheme as proposed was totally inadvisable, in their opinion; that a great deal more information had to be obtained, and I think they recommended the appropriation of something like half a million dollars to investigate the Nicaragua Canal route. Congress made an appropriation, first of $250,000 for that purpose and afterwards $100,000 more. At any rate, there was $350,000 in the two appropriations for that investigation of the Nacaragua Canal route, which was made by the Nicaragua Canal Commission under which I served.