Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

Lake Tahoe to Kern County on the south. This is a band in the heartland of California more than 300 miles long and represents the most productive agricultural area of the State.

We fully support the construction of the project now before you for these reasons:

First. The full capacity is urgently needed to provide supplemental agricultural, domestic, and industrial water to western Placer County, which is rapidly becoming a part of the metropolitan area of Sacramento, the capital city of California. This new supply also is needed to restore dropping ground water levels in Sacramento and San Joaquin Counties to stabilize an existing agricultural economy, and to provide industrial and municipal water in urban areas throughout the service area.

Second. Being operated for carryover storage, Auburn Reservoir can take advantage of the tremendous flows of the North Fork of the American River during wet years which ordinarily would be wasted to the ocean. I have pointed out a specific example during last December. Also, during the wet year of 1958, for example, the reservoir, completely empty, probably would have filled and spilled with the one year's runoff. Remaining good dam and reservoir sites are more and more scarce in California, and it is just good business to utilize them to their utmost potential so as to not preclude further development later.

Third. Auburn Reservoir would work in conjunctive operation with Folsom Reservoir downstream, allowing a more stabilized water surface at the latter reservoir, with its tremendous recreational use.

Fourth, it would provide more flood control storage, so badly needed for the protection of the Sacramento metropolitan area, with its 600,000 people now and projected population of 1 million within the next 15 or 20 years.

Also and this is partially related to the recent dry cycle-in most sections of California, prior to this winter runoff was only 50 percent of normal-but mainly to population and economic growth, the need for supplemental water for irrigation, and industrial and domestic uses is accelerating rapidly. Underground water tables throughout the great Central Valley are falling due to lack of adequate surface supplies, and the overdrawing of the ground-water bank accounts. It is significant to note in this connection that deliveries of water from the presently constructed features of the Central Valley project have retarded, but not stopped, the lowering of ground water levels in many of the existing project service areas.

Governor Brown, in his statement, has discussed the relationship of this project and those planned or being built by the State of California and local agencies. We concur fully in what he says.

We submit that California has done a tremendous amount toward supplying its water needs. Still, the fact remains that our needs are outstripping our supplies, and that Federal participation is needed more than ever to close this gap.

The second point is that there are districts, which having been formed especially for this purpose, are ready, willing, and able to contract for water from the project. Most of them are represented here and will testify as to this point, as well as to their need of supplemental water.

There are many other points I could make, but these will be discussed in more detail by the various districts and communities having an interest in the benefits of this project.

In summary, Auburn-Folsom South unit is needed now for flood control, for supplemental agricultural water, for municipal and industrial water, for power for pumping, for recreation, and to supplement inflow to the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta.

The California Water Commission respectfully but strongly urges that your committee approve pending legislation authorizing this project.

Thank you. That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Brody.

Mr. Aspinall, any questions?

Mr. ASPINALL. I have one question.

I am very glad Mr. Brody brought to your attention this question of the wasting of 1,500,000 acre-feet of water.

How much does water sell for under this project?

Mr. BRODY. There are various rates established. It would sell at $275 an acre-foot for irrigation for Folsom South Canal, as I recall the price, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ASPINALL. That is even greater than the estimated flood control damage that you were going to have.

Mr. BRODY. Yes; it is.

Mr. ASPINALL. One other question. What is the position of the California authorities on the inclusion of the provision in the legislation which would permit the concentrating of private utilities for the wheeling of power if it is found to be advisable?

Mr. BRODY. Insofar as this project is concerned, insofar as I am aware of it, Mr. Chairman, the positon of the State would be as indicated by Mr. Dominy. There is no disagreement with the policy expressed by Mr. Dominy in terms of the wheeling arrangements that were discussed here.

Mr. ASPINALL. I don't know that I heard Mr. Dominy, but I heard the Secretary's statement-I think it was the Secretary's statement, maybe it was Mr. Dominy's. But inasmuch as the two plans would be working pretty well together-Folsom and Auburn-it seems to me that those lines would be completely Federal, while other lines which are not in place and could be used belong to private facilities should be given a chance to be Federal.

Mr. BRODY. That is as I understand it, as I understand it the present wheeling arrangements contemplate this.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Thank you very much.

Mr. Skubitz?

Mr. SKUBITZ. No questions.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Johnson?

Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank you, Mr. Brody, for coming here today and testifying in behalf of that project. As chairman of the California Water Commission and a former employee of the Bureau of Reclamation you certainly know the area up there. And you have been with us out there since about 1940, I believe, dealing with water matters. I know of no other person in California who is better qualified to testify on behalf of this project that is so vitally needed for our State.

I think your statement covers all of the aspects of the project. And I agree with the chairman of the full committee that this is one of the big things that we wanted to see, because the flood storage space in each of the reservoirs, we can really put those reservoirs to a good use and trap that water which otherwise is released now. And the reservoir at Folsom has been drawn down to make room for that flood storage at the next storm in the spring runoff.

Now, I do believe that the areas that you represent also in another capacity are very much interested in seeing this reservoir built at the present time, because you are looking to the day when your East Side area can be brought into the limelight and a supply of water brought forth to this facility.

Mr. BRODY. That is correct.

Mr. JOHNSON. I have no other questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Reinecke?

Mr. REINECKE. No questions.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Thank you, Mr. Brody.

Our first public witness is Mr. Cassidy.

Mr. BRODY. This is Mr. Cassidy, chairman of the Auburn Dam Committee.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Before we proceed, do you know whether Mr. Ely is here or whether he is planning on coming?

Mr. BRODY. It is my understanding that Mr. Ely will not be able to appear personally. I do have a statement of the area that he represents that I will submit.

This is Mr. Cassidy, who is chairman of the Auburn Dam Committee. He represents a good many entities in that area, Mr. Chair

man.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. It is nice to see you again, Mr. Cassidy. I see you are getting to be quite an expert in testifying here. You have testified several times, if I recall. It is nice to see you again.

STATEMENT OF B. W. CASSIDY, CHAIRMAN, AUBURN DAM

COMMITTEE

Mr. CASSIDY. Mr. Chairman, the committee of which I am chairman was formed in 1955 immediately following that violent Christmas flood we had at that time to promote the construction of the reclamation project for the Central Valley.

The committee at the present time is composed of 29 members from central California. And this committee has been very active in water problems and mainly relating to the construction of this particular project.

The committee has functioned very well over the 10-year during the 10-year period, and is naturally vitally interested in all reclamation projects in the State, particularly in the Central Valley.

The benefits which will accrue to our immediate area have been discussed, and I will summarize those briefly. The agreement between the Bureau of Reclamation and the Placer County Water Agency which allows the storage and diversion of some 237,000 acre-feet annually by the year 2000 is certainly of vital interest to Placer County, one of the counties in which the structure will be situated.

The construction of the project certainly will be beneficial; also the ensuing recreation benefits which will accrue.

The Placer County Water Agency project is nearing completion at the present time and will be completed in 1966. Included in that project is a diversion tunnel from the Auburn Reservoir to the western section of Placer County to divert the water of which I was just speaking.

It is indeed a pleasure to be here, Mr. Chairman, and we thank you for the opportunity.

(The prepared statement of Mr. Cassidy follows:)

STATEMENT OF BILL CASSIDY, CHAIRMAN OF THE AUBURN DAM COMMITTEE IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 485 AND COMPANION BILLS TO AUTHORIZE THE AUBURN-FOLSOM SOUTH UNIT OF THE CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Bill Cassidy. I am chairman of the Auburn Dam Committee. The committee was formed as a nonprofit organization early in the year following the disastrous floods of 1955 which devastated Northern California and pointed up the fact that additional flood-control storage was vitally needed in the American River Basin.

At the present time our committee consists of 29 members who represent cities, counties, agriculture, and business in the eight-county area comprising Placer, El Dorado, Sacramento, San Joaquin, Alameda, Santa Clara, San Benito, and San Francisco. Many municipalities and various political subdivisions and other interested organizations within these and other counties are represented here today by their statements in support of the project which have been submitted for the record.

During its brief existence (10 years) Folsom Dam, on the American River downstream from the Auburn Dam cite, with a capacity of 1 million acre-feet has saved untold millions in property damage to the downstream areas. In 1955 the terrible Christmas-week storms struck while Folsom was storing its initial water and was at a relatively low stage of less than 300,000 acre-feet. By the time the storms ceased, Folsom was at capacity after spilling at maximum for 3 days. This uncomfortably close margin has been repeated twice since 1955 and the most dramatically in December of 1964 when the peak inflow reached 280,000 cubic feet per second.

Folsom has been credited with preventing $40 million loss in flood damages during our most recent storm.

Had Auburn Dam been constructed and in operation during December 1964, Folsom's flood control capacity would have been doubled; and of equal importance to the State of California, Auburn would have stored, for later beneficial use, much of the 1.5 million acre-feet which passed through Folsom during and immediately following the storm.

Thus the construction of Auburn is vital to the long-range protection of Sacramento against future floods.

At the present time California has a population of 18.1 million people. Projecting an increase to 1985 (20 years) of another 14.3 million in the State. points up the need for additional water-conservation projects in the Central Valley area.

The immediate construction of Auburn-Folsom South is the next logical step in this water-conservation program to provide additional water for the proposed service area of Sacramento and San Joaquin areas and to supplement depleting ground water supply in the two counties.

The Foresthill and Malby features of the project are of vital importance to the two counties of Placer and El Dorado. Details of these features are contained in other statements which have been submitted. Other immediate benefit to the two counties will be construction of the Auburn Dam and Folsom South Canal. The recreation features of the project will be in the category of longrange benefits.

The Placer County Water Agency project on the upper reaches of the middle fork of the American is nearing completion. The $115 million project has water rights on the stream, and, through an agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation, a purchase of water-both of which amount to 237,000 acre-feet in the aggregate. All of this water will be diverted from Auburn Reservoir through a tunnel into western Placer County. The tunnel and pumping plant are also nearing completion by the local agency at the present time.

When Auburn Reservoir is in operation, the water will be diverted by gravity, thus eliminating the necessity for pumping from the riverbed.

In summary, the Auburn Dam Committee and the agencies it represents will be benefited by all of the multipurpose uses of the Auburn-Folsom South project. We urge your committee to recommend the early authorization of this vitally needed project as set forth in the various reports before you.

It has again been a pleasure to appear before your committee today and should you have any questions relating to our committee or our views on the project we will be pleased to answer them for you or secure answers at an early date.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. It is nice to have you, Mr. Cassidy.

Do you have any questions, Mr. Aspinall?

Mr. ASPINALL. No questions. I am glad to have Mr. Cassidy's statement for the record.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Has that place been on fire any more?

Mr. CASSIDY. No, sir; if we could get a project it would eliminate the source of most of those fires.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Skubitz?

Mr. SKUBITZ. No questions.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Johnson?

Mr. JOHNSON. I am glad to see Mr. Cassidy there as chairman of the Auburn County Committee. As he stated the committee was formed after the 1955 floods, and I was very glad to join at that time, as a member of the State senate, in the activities of the Auburn Dam Committee, and covering the nine-county area. It has been a very active committee, and certainly they have done everything possible to bring this project into being.

Mr. CASSIDY. I want to say for the rest of the membership on the committee, you have given us a great deal of help in the meeting we had out there about a month ago where we had 200 water leaders from all over the State of California. I never attended a meeting that had more people in attendance that were interested in California water. I think it was a very fine meeting, and it helped me in a number of ways in putting together the people who are here today to testify in behalf of this project. That is all.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Burton?

Mr. BURTON of California. No questions.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Reinecke?

Mr. REINECKE. No questions.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. The reason I mentioned fire business is that every other reason supporting this project has been given, and I think it should be brought out that it will be a good deterrent to fire in that

canyon.

Mr. CASSIDY. An excellent suggestion. I will include that in my next statements. Thank you very much.

Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Thank you very much, Mr. Cassidy.

Mr. Brody?

Mr. BRODY. Mr. Chairman, I might mention that Mr. Cassidy informs me that he has been authorized to represent the board of supervisors of Placer County here in connection with the question asked by Mr. Aspinall relating to tax matters, that that board of supervisors is completely in support of this project, and the resolution has been presented to that effect.

45-696-65- 9

« AnteriorContinuar »