Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Mr. MCCLATCHY. The evident intent of Congress, as indicated in the act of 1893, was to restore, so far as it could, in the Sacramento River the degree of navigability which it had in 1860, and the California Débris Commission was expressly directed to find, if it could, some means to restore that navigation. The débris commission worked 17 years, and has finally submitted a plan. Now the engineers say of that plan that it is the only plan that can be relied on that is economical and feasible, and that it is the only plan which will maintain a degree of navigability throughout the river's length. Upon the success of this project depends any inland waterway system which the State may attempt to develop in the future, and therefore the nation, in caring for navigation in California, has an overshadowing interest in the project. It is plan that the tworivers of the State, the Sacramento and the San Joaquin, must serve as the main arteries of any inland waterway system. The report of the United States engineers explains why the Sacramento River, with its 260 miles of navigable channel, is dependent for protection on this project. The San Joaquin River is equally dependent upon it, because the two rivers have in effect a common delta, and floods in the Sacramento will carry deposits of silt through various sloughs and channels into the San Joaquin, while breaks or crevasses in the east levee of the Sacramenta River below Sacramento City will precititate the flood across the lower end of Sacramento County into the San Joaquin River and cause injury and flood on that river up to and including the city of Stockton.

The commercial development of the two valleys, comprising 10,000,000 acres of rich agricultural lands, and the enormous carrying business for the river which can be created thereby are actually dependent upon the completion of the flood-control project, since only through it can be assured the inland waterway system and the cheap freight rates to tidewater which would insure world markets for the possible products of the two valleys.

Some of the people of the San Joaquin Valley insist that their immediate need is irrigation rather than navigation. That belief is not borne out by this fact: Of the 4,000,000 acres of land in California, for which irrigation facilities are provided, only 3,000,000 acres take advantage of those facilities. It is evident therefore that there is lacking the incentive-in other words, the market--which would justify the use of this water in growing valuable products on the remaining million acres, much of it in the San Joaquin Valley. Facilities for irrigation will not induce the growing of crops even on rich land when the cheap water rates, necessary to move such crops to a profitable market, are lacking.

In a measure then the commercial growth of the State is dependent upon the Sacramento River project. The Nation, aside from its care for navigation, has an interest in preventing an economic waste, through disuse, of such an immense area of land, which, because of climate and conditions, could furnish supplies for a large part of the Nation in time of stress.

Mr. SMALL. You come to Congress and you ask that Congress make an appropriation, jointly to be expended with a like amount to be appropriated by the State of California, to enlarge this outlet of the river here, so as to provide for the outflow of the water, and for the building, jointly with the State, of certain weirs. Now suppose at

that time it should appear that the law which California has passed, by which a large burden is to be assumed by the landowners in the valley, has been attacked and is in the court, and suppose it is stated or assumed as a fact that California would not provide the necessary land, the riparian land where this outlet river is to be widened, or that there was some improbability that the necessary land for this by-pass could be secured, or that there should be a serious sectional controversy here in this valley, or between both valleys, regarding any essential feature for the carrying out of your plan for flood control, of course, that would act as a deterrent upon the Committee on Rivers and Harbors and upon Congress. Now, is the State in a position to say now that all of these matters have been eliminated and that the State of California is in a position to do its part?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. There remains only the question which is involved in any enterprise-of the legality of certain features of the act—and neither I nor any other man can tell what the court will decide. In the first place, the State of California has formally approved the entire project, and she has committed herself to the plan of assessing benefitted landowners for the $30,000,000, or approximately that amount, necessary to carry out her portion of the project. This plan was formulated by the reclamationists-the people who have to pay those taxes. The Reclamation Board was given police power to prevent reclamationists from doing work that would interfere with this plan. The reclamationists came to the legislature themselves to advocate and pass these measures.

Mr. SMALL. Then, to put it another way, California, through its legislature, has done all that is necessary, and the only contingency involved is as to the power of the State to do what it attempted to do?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Yes. This is an immense project and it required a great campaign of education before it was adopted by the State. There are in this district 14 counties, and 60,000 parcels of land that will have to be assessed. The intent of the State and the people have been so thoroughly shown that even should that act be declared unconstitutional there is absolutely no question but that the proper remedy will be applied. We have levied an assessment for the ordinary work of the board, calling in $150,000 of such assessment. The State appropriated $250,000 more at its last session, for work at the river's mouth, being that much ahead of any congressional appropriation. All appropriations made by Congress are made contingent upon appropriations for like amounts made by the State being paid into the United States Treasury before the congressional appropriation is available.

(Mr. C. E. Grunsky suggested that the committee should secure the following documents:

Report of the Examining Commission on Rivers and Harbors, Charles F. Reed, J. J. and C. E. Grunsky, to the governor of the State of California, 1889-1900. Report of the Commissioner of Public Works of California, 1895, which contains the report of Consulting Engineers Manson and Grunsky.)

Mr. GRUNSKY. The latter document has the first reference to the by-pass scheme of river treatment.

Mr. MCCLATCHY. In regard to the physical conditions in connection with the Sacramento River flood control project, nature herself is at present operating certain by-passes through the large basins

in Sutter, Yolo, and other counties for the purpose of carrying off the extreme excess floods down to tidewater. These excess floods find their way through various breaks in the river levees and are carried down and returned into the river near Rio Vista. As a matter of fact, the plan of flood control designed by the engineers simply utilizes the troughs of these basins and aims to control these extreme floods by holding them within by-passes in such basins and conducting them into such by-passes over weirs, so that, first, the river levees themselves will not be injured and destroyed, the integrity of the river will be maintained, and its navigability preserved; second, that there will be within these basins no unnecessary amount of land wasted for by-pass purposes and no damage done to improved property.

If the work of the reclamation board were to be temporarily suspended, the natural conditions indicated would simply continue, and these floods would injure, more or less, the river by destroying levees, diverting the current through the breaks or crevasses, and depositing bars below them, and the flood waters would then find their way through the basins down to tidewater. If, however, the State and the United States combine in the construction of the outlet weirs, such action will have the effect of maintaining the levees by letting the excess waters out of the channel into the basins under control. The floods thus passing into the basins would be less in volume than if the levees were allowed to break at random. Under such conditions the completion of the Government work in opening the river's mouth would be as effective in protecting the river and aiding navigation as though the by-passes also had been constructed. There would be, however, material difference in conditions in the overflowed basins, and there would be material injury to reclamation interests.

The cooperation by the State and the United States in finishing work on the weirs and at the river's mouth will thus be effective, so far as concerns navigation and flood control within the river channel, even though the State reclamation board should temporarily lose its jurisdiction over levee construction within the basins. The facts outlined indicate, too, the equity of the distribution of expense made by the outlined plan.

As to the legal phase of it, the State of California by a legislative act has already pledged herself to carry out and pay her share of the incidental expenses of that portion of the project indicated by the engineers as being directly involved in the interests of navigation; that is to say, the deepening and widening of the mouth of the river and the construction of four weirs. No one has questioned in any way the right of the State to do this thing. No one has questioned or contested the propriety of the State doing this thing. As a matter of fact, the bills approving of the project and providing for the necessary appropriations have been passed without opposition.

Mr. SMALL. When were the California Débris Commission and the reclamation board organized or created, and what are their respective duties?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. The California Débris Commission was created by act of Congress of 1893. They were specifically instructed to find, if possible, and report a plan which would restore, as near as practicable, to the Sacramento River the degree of navigability which it

had in 1860. The evident intent of Congress was to remedy, if it could, the damage which had been done to the river by the operation of hydraulic mining and the depositing in the stream of mining débris, the Government probably recognizing the fact that under its authority it might have stopped the mining which caused that débris, and did

not.

Mr. SMALL. How is the membership of that commission appointed? Mr. MCCLATCHY. The California Débris Commission is composed of three members of the Corps of Engineers, United States Army, appointed by the War Department.

The State reclamation board was organized by act of the special session of the legislature of December, 1911. It was composed originally of three members. It was created for the specific purpose of aiding, so far as it could, the United States Government in carrying out the flood-control project as designed by the engineers. The act formally adopted the project and provided that no reclamation plans might be carried out, or even adopted, by private districts or individuals until they had been submitted to this board and had been approved by it as not interfering in any way with the floodcontrol project. In the regular session of 1913, on request of the reclamation land owners themselves, a bill was passed, formulated by them, very largely increasing the powers of the board-making them quite arbitrary, and attempting, in various ways, to secure a better cooperation between the Government and State for the early completion of the project. In 1915 the act was still further amended for the purpose of correcting defects which had appeared therein and for the purpose of conferring additional powers requested by the reclamation interests.

The portion of the project which is to be paid for at the joint expense of the State and Nation, including the widening of the river and the construction of four weirs, is under the sole direction of the California Débris Commission, acting for the War Department and the Government. All other portions of the project, which include the planning and construction and maintenance of 500 miles of river levees, the securing of all rights of way for by-passes (about 85,000 acres), the construction of all by-pass levees (about 180 miles), and the general direction of private reclamation improvement so as to conform to the flood-control project, is under the direction of the reclamation board. That board, however, in passing upon these plans acts upon the recommendations not only of the State engineers, but also the débris commission engineers, and no o: der has been made and no plans approved that have not first received the commendation of both sets of engineers. The executive officer of the débris commission, or his assistant engineer, meets with the board regularly, and keeps thereby in close touch with its policies. There is secured in this way the utmost harmony and effective results.

Mr. SMALL. What was the total cost of the work to be undertaken jointly by the United States and the State of California, and how was it to be divided, and in what report is that submitted?

Mr. MCCLATCHY. Under the original report of 1910, known as House Document No. 81, Sixty-second Congress, first session, the entire project, the estimated cost of which was $33,000,000, was to be apportioned equally between the United States, the State of California, and the landowners, one-third to each. In a hearing before

the Committee on Rivers and Harbors, on February 7, 1912, which Mr. Small will probably remember, the committee was not entirely satisfied with the project and, with entire propriety, pointed out that it looked to them as though the Government was made to pay for work in the interest of land reclamation, and they also pointed out a sentence in the report of the engineers that this project was not necessary in the interests of navigation. This sentence, on its face, was certainly very damaging, but its intent was entirely misconstrued.

We came back at the succeeding session with a supplemental report which has straightened out the question of misunderstanding as to the question of navigation, and work not necessary for navigation. In this report the commission states in explicit terms that they know of no other way in which navigation of the Sacramento River could be restored and permanently maintained than by this project. This report is printed in Rivers and Harbors Committee Document No. 5, Sixty-third Congress, first session. And in this report they recommend, not a change in the engineering plan, but a change in the plan of financing to this extent; that the Government and the State of California should pay jointly for the works which are for the benefit of navigation, i. e., the enlargement of the river channel below mouth of Cache Slough, for the weirs, and for the rectification and enlargement of river channels. It was estimated that the future expense for work of this character would be $11,600,000; and it was recommended that the State pay half and the United States pay half. There had already been appropriated $800,000-$400,000 by the State and $400,000 by the United States, and that amount, at this time, was almost, but not quite, expended.

The $11,600,000 was estimated as the amount of expense necessary in addition to this $800,000.

The balance of the expense involved was to be borne, under this recommendation, entirely by the interested landowners, or by the State, and the State under the reclamation act has provided for it in the way indicated in previous remarks. The work to be done by the landowners and the State consists of the construction and maintenance of all river levees (about 500 miles), the securing of the necessary rights of way for by-passes, and the construction and maintenance of all by-pass levees. The reclamation board has been given full power under the act to levy and collect assessments on lands benefited in proportion to benefits received to cover all costs of rights of way and construction work, together with compensation for damages sustained in the construction thereof.

So far as concerns the portion of the project to be paid for jointly by State and Nation, and affecting navigation, work has steadily progressed for several years past in the mouth of the river, $800,000 of joint appropriations having already been expended. In addition thereto the work is now progressing under additional appropriations of $200,000 made by the State in 1913, and allotments of $60,000 and $140,000, respectively, made by the Chief of Engineers under the river and harbor bills of 1913 and 1914. In addition thereto the California Legislature of 1915 passed an appropriation of $250,000 for the same work, to be available on the appropriation of a similar amount by Congress; this simply in furtherance of the policy established by the State in its formal adoption of the flood-control project

« AnteriorContinuar »