Page 21

RELEASE OF COLORADO RIVER WATER 17 Mr. DOMINY. This is one of the first things that Secretary Udall had me to undertake, to step up our progress on the studies, to try to get into a position to not just talk about it but be prepared to start corrective measures in the lower basin to salvage water in that critically short river. Senator ANDERSON. There are several things, then, that maybe this committee and others ought to concern themselves about. One would be the question of dredging. We certainly ought to have a dredge available so you can go to work on it. The second would be the 12,000-acre-foot regulatory reservoir at "Congressman" Wash. The third might be this question of trying to channelize the river and eliminate the phreatophytes which are using a great deal of water. Those three things, I think, Mr. Secretary, would greatly improve the situation in the river. We are not going to have peace and harmony on the river just as soon as the Supreme Court hands down its decision. After the decision is when the fighting is really going to start. Secretary UDALL. Senator, I have gotten a little education here this morning, too. If I may make an observation or two, it seems to me that we are on the river going into a period of profound change. There has only been one major structure on the river at Hoover. We have lived in a situation in the Colorado River Basin of water surplus, one might say, over the past years. As far as we could even contemplate, although it is ridiculous under present circumstances, the navigation on the river, the flood control problem, we are going to move quickly now with the closing of these two big dams this fall. Navajo Dam will be closed this year. We will move into a period when our control of the river is going to be much greater, the possibility of floods is going to be much less, water is going to be much dearer. We are going to have to manage much more precisely than heretofore. It seems to me that the best way to avoid what we have had to do in carrying out this river regulation control responsibility, which is an added responsibility over and above our treaty responsibility and other responsibilities, is to get a channel, just as you suggested, and to do the work on the river so that we can manage it more precisely and that we do not have to, in effect, waste water. I do not think we can afford to waste water in the future. I think this hearing this morning is very useful in that it puts all of this in very sharp focus. It certainly has for me. Senator ANDERSON. It is also, in a way, a question of economics. Water that is used for sluicing is worth a couple of dollars an acre-foot. Water used for industrial purposes, irrigation, domestic use, is worth a vast amount more than that, and we ought to use it to the best possible advantage. I will be glad to help in any way I can, and I know that others will be glad to, to try to bring about the accomplishment of some of these things that you folks have talked about. I think this question raised is a very important one. I know that the early work on channeling the Rio Grande, while it was presented as an effort to improve our relationships with Mexico and also for many other things, had some bearing to the public relief programs that we had in those days because it would create some employment along that river in an area that needed employment.Epson Perfection 4870 Photo, 400 dpi, 8 bit, 1,575,107 byte