and the land sold to the white settlers. Has there been any special effort to return to the land owner, the Indian, or the Government, that amount of money or more? I am told the Yuma project, with possibilities similar to this, brought $25 an acre. Mr. ENGLE. Yes; it did. Mr. ELSTON. In other words, if this land is tillable to-day, the Indian himself, before anything is put onto the land, would get back $25 an acre? Mr. ENGLE. Of course, this land at $25 an acre is the mesa land, which they consider has a large potential value as citrus-fruit land. Mr. ELSTON. Have you made any estimate as to what the total annual charge per acre would be here under these pumping opertions, putting water on the land, irrespective of these partial returns, which you state did not include all the overhead, which you said was 45 cents an acre, I think? Mr. ENGLE. I would say it would range from $6 to $8 per acre per year. Mr. ELSTON. How many acre-feet would that put on the land? Mr. ENGLE. Four acre-feet. Mr. ELSTON. That is necessary? Mr. ENGLE. I do not think that 4 acre-feet are necessary. I think 3 to 34 Mr. ELSTON. If that were accurate, and it was reimbursable right away, it would mean that your charge per acre to the Indian or anyone else for putting this water on his land, covering all overhead charges, would be about $6 per acre per year? Mr. ENGLE. Yes; $6 to $8. Mr. ELSTON. That does not carry, however, the interest on the capital invested or the amortization to liquidate the capital investment? Mr. ENGLE. Yes. Mr. ELSTON. How does that compare between the $6 to $8 per acre per year to be paid to the allottees in order to reimburse the Government? How does that compare with the amount being paid now by the users of water in southern California, San Joaquin Valley, or any other valley in Aizona-comparable to those I have mentioned? Mr. ENGLE. Of course it is considerably more, usually for the gravity projects, and I think it compares favorably with pumping projects. Mr. ELSTON. Does it compare favorably with certain gravity projects in southern California where they have orange land? Mr. ENGLE. Yes. Mr. ELSTON. I think you will find in some portions of the San Joaquin Valley that it is that much or more. Mr. RHODES. You have made it clear that unless those representing the Indians here took advantage of the opportunity before it was too late possibly all water rights that might arise to this reservation would be lost. I want to ask you if it is a matter of fact that it has been determined, mathematically or otherwise, that the volume of water carried by the Colorado River is insufficient to irrigate all the land within a reasonable distance from the stream? Mr. ENGLE. Yes; it is. For the past seven years the Imperial Valley, after the regular annual flood, has thrown across the Colo rado at Hanlon Heading a temporary weir to divert the entire lowwater flow of the Colorado River, which has been insufficient for the past three years to properly irrigate the land that they have already under cultivation, and that area is constantly increasing, and the area under cultivation in the Imperial Valley is constantly increasing. Mr. HAYDEN. In addition to the 100,000 acres of bottom land that might be irrigated, is there any other area of land that might be conserved, whereby by raising the water by pumps it might be done? Mr. ENGLE. Fifteen thousand to 20,000 acres, depending on how that might be classified. Some of it is a little rough-15,000 to 20,000 acres on the Parker Mesa here and about 10,000 acres on the Calzona Mesa. Mr. HAYDEN. On the California side of the river? Mr. ENGLE. Yes, sir. Mr. HAYDEN. These two mesas could be irrigated by raising the water by pumps? How high? Mr. ENGLE. Yes, sir; 60 to 75 feet lift. Mr. HAYDEN. Is that as high a lift as on the Yuma Mesa? Mr. HAYDEN. As I understand it, the Yuma mesa land was sold on the basis of $25 an acre as the value of the land and $200 an acre for the cost of placing water on it. Mr. ENGLE. That is correct. That is the minimum charge. We sold to the highest bidder, and in a great many cases they sold for more than $225 an acre. That is the minimum charge. Mr. HAYDEN. Is the land on these mesas-the Parker mesa and the Calzona mesa-practically the same acreage as Yuma mesa? Mr. ENGLE. Possibly. Mr. HAYDEN. Do you think these mesas could stand as high a water charge as $200 an acre? Mr. ENGLE. I think so. Mr. HAYDEN. With a profit to those who buy it? Mr. ENGLE. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. That goes on to another question: A few moments ago you told the gentleman from California that the cost of 4 acre-feet of water would be from $6 to $8, considering the overhead-the actual expense of putting it there. Mr. ENGLE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. Suppose you spent $8,000,000 here in installing this plant and roads, etc., as it should be, and, considering the 6 per cent interest charge against that, it would be $480,000 as an overhead charge per annum? Mr. ENGLE. Yes. The CHAIRMAN. After that and the cost of upkeep, what do you say would be the cost of 4 acre-feet of water per annum on each acre of this project, in comparison with your statement to Mr. Elston? Mr. ENGLE. About $3 per 4 acre-feet. The CHAIRMAN. How could that be? The interest cost on the land would be $4. If you had 100,000 acres, the interest charge on the land would be $4.80 an acre. There must be some cost in addition to the interest. r. FNGLE. Perhaps I have not got the question. The CHAIRMAN. The point about it is that you have made a statement that, including the overhead, the actual cost of the water necessary now to supply 4 acre-feet on the 10,000 acres that you have under water is between $6 and $8 an acre. What I want to know is, including the overhead cost of construction of this here and the actual cost of operating that $8,000,000 plant, after you have got it there, what charge per acre would you estimate that to be? Mr. ENGLE. You are including this interest on construction in the gravity project and you are not considering it in the other. The CHAIRMAN. You said after your overhead, and certainly your overhead means interest charge. Mr. ELSTON. I included in my question amortization of capital, and I said $6 to $8, including everything, which would finally wipe out the capital investment. Mr. ENGLE. Yes; that is true. The CHAIRMAN. Then, you can not at this time make a proper comparison. Mr. HAYDEN. On what do you base that $3 statement which you made? Mr. ENGLE. I was simply including the cost of putting the water on the land and maintaining the system-maintaining the ditches. Mr. HAYDEN. $3 an acre for that and $4.80 interest would be $7.80 per acre. Mr. ENGLE. Yes. The irrigable area of bottom land included in the proposed project is in one compact body, whereas at Yuma the irrigable area of bottom land is in three widely separate tracts, requiring diversion works on both sides of the river and the construction of an inverted siphon under the river. This siphon alone cost $677,000. The diversion weir will be less than one-third the length of the Laguna Weir. The topography at the proposed dam site is such that more suitable diversion works can be constructed. It will be necessary to construct a levee only on one side of the river, whereas at Yuma the river is leveed on both sides for a considerable distance. The total length of levee on the proposed project is 42 miles, while at Yuma there are 73 miles. Preliminary estimated cost of proposed project. 15 cubic yards class 1 (1-2-4) concrete in place, at $15___ $225 200 100 30 Schedule 2. By-pass, sluiceway, and canal headgates: 400,000 cubic yards excavation, at $0.20- 100,000 cubic yards wet excavation, at $1. $80,000 100,000 15,000 cubic yards concrete pavement, at $8. 40.000 120.000 90,000 800,000 pounds reinforcing steel, at $6 per hundredweight_. 20 canal headgates, at $1,000.. 48,000 20,000 50,000 cubic yards rock excavation, at $1.50. 400,000 cubic yards main canal excavation stations 0 to 133, at $0.25 100.000 75,000 1 mile concrete canai lining, at $20 per foot. 100,000 100,000 cubic yards canal bank revetment, at $1.50.... 150,000 1,000,000 cubic yards main west side canal excavation, at $0.25_ 1,800,000 cubic yards canal and lateral excavation, at $0.33}. Structures: Waste-gate structure station 133 main canal_ 5 division structures, main canal_. 700,000 cubic yards main east side canal excavation, at $0.25_. 175,000 250,000 600,000 30,000 30,000 50 lateral turnout structures, 40 to 60 second-feet capacity. 10 by-pass structures_-_ 60,000 50.000 150 concrete lateral turnout structures 10 to 30 second-feet 10 miles of rock revetment, 300.000 cubic yards rock, at $1.50 30,000 166 000 500,000 600,000 252.000 450,000 1.998,000 Total Engineering contingencies, etc., 10 per cent_ Total estimated cost of protective levee_. Schedule 5. Drainage system: 800.000 cubic yards excavation, main drain, at $0.25_ 750,000 cubic yards excavation, lateral drains, at $0.25. Bridges and other structures. Pumping plant... Total Engineering, etc., 10 per cent. Total estimated cost 199,800 2.197, 800 200,000 187,500 100.0 75,000 562,500 56,250 618, 750 Ising redwood lumber instead of concrete for these structures would reduce the Fed cost of the distributing system $77,500, or would reduce the total for the ring system to $2,117,000. STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM E. THACKREY, SUPERINTENDENT FORT MOJAVE INDIAN RESERVATION. The CHAIRMAN. State your name and official title. Mr. THACKREY. William E. Thackrey, superintendent Fort Mojave Indian Reservation. Mr. HAYDEN. How many Indian pupils in your school? Mr. THACKREY. One hundred and fifty at present. Mr. HAYDEN. Of what tribes? Mr. THACKREY. Mojave, Chemehuevi, and Piutes. Mr. HAYDEN. Just what is the difference between the Chemehuevi and Mojave Indians? Mr. THACKREY. The Chemehuevi is more of a Nevada Indian, closely related to the Piute. Mr. HAYDEN. Does he speak the same language as the Mojave? Mr. THACKREY. More related to the Piute Indian. Mr. HAYDEN. Where do they live now? Mr. THACKREY. They live, part of them, along the river opposite Fort Mojave and part of them along the Chemehuevi Valley, but most of them moved away, I think. Mr. HAYDEN. Do any of them live in Arizona? Mr. THACKREY. None of them live in Arizona. Mr. HAYDEN. Where do the Piute Indian children come from? Mr. THACKREY. They come from Moapa and from the schools near Santa Clara. Mr. HAYDEN. In the State of Nevada? Mr. THACKREY. In the State of Utah and from Kaibab. Mr. HAYDEN. How are the numbers of those children divided in your school? How many are Mojaves? Mr. THACKREY. I can tell you nearer the number of the others and get the Mojaves from that. I can give you all the tribes. We have 18 from the Mojave-Apache from Camp Verde and we have 6 Havasupai from Cataract Canyon; we have 18 or 20 of the Piutes, and the rest of them are Mojaves and Chemehuevis. I should judge that the remaining portion is pretty evenly divided between the Mojaves and the Chemehuevis, a few more Mojaves than Chemehuevis. Mr. HAYDEN. Your school is classed as a nonreservation school? Mr. THACKREY. Yes. Mr. HAYDEN. Separately provided for by Congress? Mr. THACKREY. Specifically provided for. Mr. HAYDEN. The question was asked about an appropriation to replace one of your buildings destroyed by fire. What steps have been taken to replace that? |